On 22/01/2013 08:03, Davey Crockett wrote:
Phil a écrit profondement:

| I mean what will the history books show? Just a big gap for those 7
| years almost as if the tour was not run? They really cant show that
| Lance won. Perhaps his name will still appear but with a huge asterisk
| next to his name but then, I don't see how that would accomplish
| lance's demise. After all it would still appear as if he won. They
| really can't give the title to whoever came in second as they were
| probably doping as well. Giving the title to a runner up who was also
| doping would hardly be fair to Lance. But then the Lance haters would
| say that one would have to prove that the runner up was doping while
| they required no such thing to go after LA...It is a conundrum

They'll probably just move them up.

These moves will sometimes be reported and sometimes not in the
journals and records sites.

The best place for info is Dominique Magniers "Mémoire du
Cyclisme" and he always footnotes déclassé and other vital info in
footnotes. See:
http://www.memoire-du-cyclisme.net/championnats/chpt_mondial_itt.php

This is a great site and most of it is freely available, but Davey
pays the 15 Euros - a guy who produces a site like that deserves
our support.

looks like a very good site, I'm seriously thinking about the 15 euros,
I see they've already got a report up on Cavendish winning the first San
Luis stage.