Really, he was Conconi client with all the other Banesto riders and when the storm was to enter Peloton after the failed blitz by police at Giro in 1996, he understood that was time to leave.

I assumed Indurain was going to be #1 on the list.

And he never got caught!

He deserves it along with ex. Greg Lemond that somehow got tremendously much better the year EPO went into clinical trials in his backyard, had his biggest success when EPO could be prescribed by regular doctors and dropped like a rock 1½ years after. Merkx, Indurein, Fignon, Hinault, Aqetil, Ulrich, Basso, Contador, Froome.... Why did English riders suddenly succeed when while having astma?

@@jenspetersen5865 Greg LeMond actually got screwed by EPO. That's why he got dropped like a rock the year after 1990, like you said, because everyone else started using it and he was never able to compete again

Rominger, Cipollini und Indurain wurden nie positiv getestet. Ugrumov Proben aus dem Jahr 1995 wiesen einen Hämatokritwert von 60 auf, also EPO verwendet.

@@TheMetallass na ja... wie kann man immer noch so naive sein? Armstrong, Rijs usw. wurden damals auch nie positiv getestet.

@@joanvallve7647 Das sind Tatsachen. Du kannst niemanden ohne Beweise verurteilen.

@@TheMetallass Doch. Du kannst. Die Frage ist ob es stimmt oder nicht. In 2024 ist es schon 100% klar was damals passiert ist. Und ganz ehrlich war schon in 2007 klar.Hast du noch nicht Ulle's Doku gesehen?

There was little EPO could do to a sprinter.

Indurains performances were even more surreal

Gotta agree with you there. Recently was watching some video and seen a TT bike that shit looked goofy as all hell man idk what they did to it looked like it got smashed by a hydraulic press or someshit. Bikes used to look elegant

Yea, those old school bikes look great! Except for the TT bikes though.. 😅 some of them was a bit too strange.

A super record campag colnago from the 80s is a joy to behold.

Es wurde vermutet, das er gedopt sei, aber nie positiv getestet.

There was little aid EPO could give to a sprinter.

I am convinced it is still rife. They are too good.

If you're going to ask even elite athletes to ride thousands of kilometres around a whole country ( sometimes several countries ) go over mountains, for a televised spectacle, then you can hardly moan when they seek out PED's

​@@colinstewart1432I wholeheartedly agree that what is asked of them for the tour for example is insane.

Lets not forget that it is much harder to not get caught now. You can stay above 3000m. and have the effect of doping. You can use hyperbaric chambers .... 10? years ago you could take the juice and live the life, but performance does not equal doping. Lance has stated that living above 2500m. in Aspen now his HC is in the mid 40'ties - much higher than when he lived in Texas.

@@jenspetersen5865You mean hyPObaric. Which are not hyPObaric at all, but relatively hypoxia, to simulate the available oxygen at high altitude. Of course, that only might be equivalent to epo, but doesn’t add the effects of HGH and anabolic steroids like testosterone.

I’m not disagreeing with you but is there any real evidence against Big-mig???

The channel has given him quite a few mentions and even made videos on him but, to their credit, this list is limited only to those who were actually caught or who admitted it. Don’t think Big Mig ever even had the decency to do the latter🤷‍♂️

Let’s not forget Brad Wiggins was also over 6’ and ‘morphed’ into a tour winner

really, he was able to climb with pure climbers who were massively treated. If you start from the point a guy like Pantani e.g. was naturally gifted and was also treated with EPO as much as possible (and the result is, like it or not, he's largely rated as the greatest grimpeur ever), how those guys like Indurain, Zuelle, Olano, Riis, Ullrich etc with a totally different frame and on paper skills were able to be on the hills with him (and Virenque, Leblanc, Escartin, Rodriguez etc)??? There's no sense, they shouldn't even have been in the position of being there, along those climbs, and having to be distanced with attacks bordering on super-human VAM. Proof at the end they were all treated (high likely even more) and we got just a 4.0 steroids multiplied context with all the values empowered to some no sense.

@@davess61I don’t know anything about cycling and just recently got interested in it. Is it detrimental to a rider to be really tall?

iknowrite? I was gonna say something but you beat me to it...hilarious!

No doubt...

Virenque was 7th on the list, so no need to be disappointed 😂 🎉🎉🎉

Because they won . But they didnt test positive the most.

Guy was still the best if everyone dopes and u win it's an even playing field

@@codino97 No, it's not. Not every body reacts the same to doping. Certainly with the max hematocrit levels in place, some could improve their naturale abilities more than others. Plus some riders were unwilling to dope and ended their (succesfull) careers early, didn't rise to pro level or were mere filling of the peloton instead of contenders.

@@codino97 No. As Lemond stated, Guys like Pantani and Indurain would have been great even without doping. Armstrong without doping was a mediocre cyclist at best. He simply cheated in a more systematic way than everyone else, had been protected more than anyone else, and made a bet. The bet was that, after the Festina scandal of 1998, the others would have cheated less for the 1999 edition, while, afraid that the tour could be considered a joke, the organization would have turned a blind eye to the doping, so he could cheat more. And he did. IE, that the riders would have been tested for corticosteroids had been announced only two days before the start. It was a surprise for everyone, but only one rider tested positive to corticosteroids FOUR TIMES (not only in the prologue) in that Tour, our dear Lance. He being only in 10th position is a joke.

He was smart to retire when hematocrit rule was introduced

Next level sarcasm. Nice.

You are a funny dude!

Are you kidding? There are just as doped now

Valverde didn’t rode in the 90s

@@cyclinghighlights as an amateur he was winning, but agreed, ….thanks for your awesome episodes

His hematocrit level was not particularly high for those years. That, at 1.76m X 68kg he could climb better than guys 10cm higher and 10kg heavier should be considered normal. That he could beat them in time trials is not, but EPO can't enhance the performances of climbers in time-trials as much as those of time-trialists in climbing (that's why those years had been dominated by time-trialists), physically he was a freak beyond any doping. Unfortunately he was also allergic to training and was gifted in irritating his teammates, otherwise he would have had a longer high-level career.

Somehow Indurain just gets off scott free, even though he kept beating doped riders! I agree with you. It's apparently a popular competition also, well known doped riders in the 90's are still celebrated as heroes during Tour de France while Riis is almost not welcome.. I won't defend Riis, but really, he's just one among the very many.

@@henrik81jensen yep, I’ve always thought it unfair that Armstrong was stripped and made into a sort of cycling Bond villain. At the same time, Zabel and Virenque get to keep their prize monies and jerseys from the same tours and they were bang at it. I too have never got this obsession with Indurain, ask Greg Lemond, he’ll tell you.

@@Servicevelo I guess Armstrong probably made too many enemies, past team members turning on him and so on. I always felt that Armstrong was looked at as a villain, maybe because he was so dominant. He might have been stripped of his victories, but really, he still won, his opponents were not innocent either, but that can of course be debated. I do listen to his podcast The Move everytime they do the Tour de France, Armstrong, Hincapie and Bruyneel, I don't think about their past in this regard, they know the cycling game so well, it very interesting.

@@henrik81jensen I see it all in much the same way. The move is excellent, as is Chris Horner’s KZfaq channel, beyond the coverage.

@@Servicevelo Yes, I think I've taken a quick glimpse of Horners channel once, will do again if you recommend. 😊

The name "Mr. 60%" was attached to Riis in an old school printed-on-paper magazine article, and the figure of 58% for Pantani - it was a big deal and it looks my sport of choice may never recover from it. Good thing it's a healthy sport that most everyone can do. _hematocrit_

Most of those wins were in the 2000s though. Needs a sequel vid

That's an interesting point. I followed the 97 TdF IRL and seeing the riders up close in skinsuits for the final Disneyland TT, I was shocked by how emaciated they looked. Virenque and Pantani were transparent in that kit.

@@janscanulfsson9295 Wow! I bet. 'Specially after 3 weeks. II was probably looking at Zabel and other flat sprint riders. Ther're are more riders in the World and it is more competitve now. Can't be fat!

cameras were different back then, made you look bigger, for real, look it up

Contador and landis weren’t around in the 90s

​@@twright1983Fair enough. 😂

Frank Vandenbroucke's palmares and fate were plenty to be on a list like this. But it's not a purely sporting list, but more like a big picture list.

Jan Ullrich is maybe the biggest talent ever. That´s why he thinks he´s not one of the most doped drivers.

Too many others probably doped even more. Indurain and Armstrong should be 1 and 2

Don’t think that

@@cyclinghighlights i would like to think Pogocar was clean yesterday with that performance

he never said that.

@@cyclinghighlights There is a new tendency to point out the 90s was the dirty period of cycling and that now riders are winning clean and performances are based on improved nutrition and training techniques. Any opinion on this?

@@landscapeandmonuments1615Naive people were saying the same thing when Armstrong was winning all of those Tours de France 😂 - doping has always been part of cycling and always will be

Sadly I question any Danes results , When Vinegaard 1st took the yellow a friend and I looked at each other and said he’s a Dane 😳

@@twinpiperzed7222 😥

King Kong Ketones, at the very least😐

also known as Mr 60

@@twinpiperzed7222 It got something to do with genes, not where you come from 😂

Not in 90s.

He had Ferrari. Bjarne riis had Cecchini.

But the video is MOST doped, not most sophisticated doping scheme. Armstrong wasn't even close to as doped as mid 90s Pantani, Riis.

Agreed. Much as we may dislike admitting it. The top third of any elite cycle race would probably be good candidates. Anquetil, Simpson and everyone after.

Lemond from California - was hot 1983-1990 EPO went into clinical trials in California 1983-1988. He would have gotten it in 1986 when he was shot, but also easily from 1983.

Lance tested positive. He had a doc write a backdated TUE to cover it up. He also admitted to it in 2012 if you're still confused that Lance was doping.

@@holdencaulfied7492 Lance Armstrong has been pretty open after his confession, but the fact remains that while he should have failed the drug test in the prologue of TDF 1999 he did not as he "had" the TUE. Claiming that Lemond was clean because he did not get busted is silly. Bjarne Riis was never busted and is likely one of the most doped cyclists ever, but both were cycling when EPO was not illegal to use!

I know what you mean, I have an emotional link with Marco for multiple reasons, I know what pro cycling was, what Marco did through those years all his bright areas and the grey ones, but you know why Marco generates bit of a different feeling and it's not just cause he died desperate and young or the specific idea you could have about the Madonna di Campiglio test and his exclusion at '99 Giro (Idk if you knew it, but he did a test in the afternoon at a hospital recognized by UCI and in addition to the hematocrit value back below 50, the platelets value is not compatible with the value of the morning, cause instead of going down it went up, this suggests something strange for that test happened, reguardless the EPO use or even techniques to lower it). He had a unique racing style, his way to intend cycling created empathy with fans, he was a nice guy who used to do anything to create spectacle for people and we loved him for those reasons. The context was what it was I mean he didn't create it, in the end he became object of media and judicial over-attention even without laws to condamn the facts, and all that for a context completely broken where everybody did the same, nobody has ever seen open inquiries for hematocrit swings and everybody kept doing it. He paid an unnecessary price, his path to self-destruction wasn't a pleasure trip. And when he entered pro peloton, the top guys were already playing with rhEPO and hematocrit levels, since this game started in the second mid of 80s and I believe around 1991-92 was already quite widespread. Big guys became all around monsters performing even on climbs and if you wanted to create a difference being a pure climber well you high likely had to go with serious levels. Therefore I honestly look at him as an Icarus who gave himself self-destruction after he played with something that somehow was forced to deal with.

Thank you for that@@leonardofabbri7930 I never liked the personality but maybe it is more of an Icarus tragedy on reflection. I mean even now people will use L-carnitine (see Salazar Farah) and all kinds of out of competition Cortisone (lose weight and strengthen) and Salbutamol etc. Not to mention whatever is untraceable and technically banned stuff. Doping may be de rigueur in all sports albeit with more attention to the one's that don't trigger a breach now. I once asked the question "Did Sharapova cheat for 18 days or 10 years?". What is doping? Taking drugs for performance only or failing a test? Being as dogmatic as I was above is wrong, accepted.

Marco will always be a fan favourite because of his GOAT climbing talent and the ability to send shivers down your spine with his attacks. He also had weaknesses unlike sistematic cheaters and robots such as Armstrong and Ullrich. Nothing to do with his death. He was simply more "human" than other athletes, despite his god given talent.

Not in the 90s, only in 99

Good one! 🤣🤣🤣

What a bullshit 🤣😜😆

90s Fignon in 90s it’s only important in 92

In 90s??

Epo 98 analysis tdf

Cycling highlights is correct. I believe Pantani finished 12th in a TT in 1998, after finishing 124th (or so) in 1997.

I have a football channel, Failed Sharks