On 22/01/2013 16:42, Fred Flintstein wrote:
On 1/21/2013 8:37 PM, Phil wrote:
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


What they did with Riis was remove his name and leave
it blank. Then they quietly added it back later.

Kind of funny that Riis is still recognized as a Tour
winner

Not to mention Ullrich and Pantani.