Marco Pantani (RIP) - 10th anniversary on Friday

letape

Its hard to believe it but this Friday (February 14th) is the 10th anniversary of Il Pirata's death.

Cyclingnews will have several look articles this week to commerate the anniversary.

The first one is here:

http://www.cyclingnews.com/features/marco-pantani-a-valentines-day-to-remember

killalanerr

despite his untimely death the fact remains that he was a cheat thats what i will remember about him

Morrisseeee

Is it OK to admire Pantani but reject Armstrong ? ! :pac:

letape

killalanerr wrote: »

despite his untimely death the fact remains that did was a cheat thats what i will remember about him

I think there is a lot more to remember about a person, than whether they cheated / took drugs or not!

Certainly for me who grew up watching him race, there is a lot more to his memory than this.

daragh_

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeYY9s6X7yY

RobFowl

I hope his tortured soul is at peace.
He should be the same age as me now not rotting in the ground.

daragh_

That's supposed to be a link to 'Rimini' by Les Wampas, which is a homage to Pantani. Link is down. You can find it on Google.

Lumen

I find that my strong disapproval of a person's behaviour tends to ebb away once they're dead.

Come on Lance, let it go. Walk in to the light.

Harrybelafonte

http://www.theroar.com.au/2013/09/20/pantani-was-not-alone-in-his-death-room/

killalanerr

i to watched him fly up the cols but now we know it was all a lie . A tortured soul indeed RIP Marco

12 sprocket

Lumen wrote: »

I find that my strong disapproval of a person's behaviour tends to ebb away once they're dead.

Come on Lance, let it go. Walk in to the light.

Must be great to be perfect

happytramp

Morrisseeee wrote: »

Is it OK to admire Pantani but reject Armstrong ? ! :pac:

Not really. But it's a lot easier to hate lance for being an utter prick.

doozerie

killalanerr wrote: »

despite his untimely death the fact remains that did was a cheat thats what i will remember about him

I can certainly understand that, and I must admit that my admiration for Pantani struggles against the side of me that finds cheating despicable. But Armstrong reset/re-educated my definition of "cheater".

Pantani cheated and lied about it, as have many other riders, and the very sad circumstances of his death don't wipe that away. Armstrong cheated, lied about it, bullied and threatened everyone around him to maintain that lie, and still expects the world to worship him as some kind of sporting hero despite the lie being exposed. In that context I'm much more inclined to see Pantani as victim of, as well as contributor to, the wider problems of cycling - I feel sympathy for him, an emotion that simply does not apply when I think of the likes of Armstrong.

Inquitus

1998 Tour de France Stage 15 into Les Deux Alpes, that's why I admire the Pirate, even if he did dope.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=123Xo9mFqeE

lizzylad84

I think its slightly unfair to compare pantani to the texan imo, i mean the level of doping armstrong was involved in is wayyy more than pantani.
watching dvds and youtube clips of pantani in his prime is simply amazing....

Did he dope? probably
Controversial? yup!
flawed...arnt we all
Entertaining? yup!

Legend in my book.
R.I.P

Lumen

12 sprocket wrote: »

Must be great to be perfect

Coming from someone who espouses "East German training methods" without any obvious sense of irony, that means a lot.

shutup

killalanerr wrote: »

despite his untimely death the fact remains that he was a cheat thats what i will remember about him

Do you watch any other sports? I've got some bad news for you.

nerraw1111

I used to be a huge fan of his. But the idea of posting videos of his performances now is ridiculous. I cringe at them.

Not sure what his legacy is, he's still a hero to many.

letape

One thing about Pantani was that he was a winner at the very highest level as soon as turned pro and before. He was second in the 94 Giro and won two stage and then went on to finish third in the Tour and take home the white jersey. In 95 he again won the white jersey at the Tour and won two back to back mountain stages. Very few riders have such a good first Tour.

It is very hard to imagine that in a world without doping that he wouldn't have been as successful. Especially when you consider who he was competing against - Indurain, Zuelle, Ullrich, Riis, Jalabert, Virenque, Chiappucci, Urgumov, Berzin...

I also think its unrealistic to expect that he would have come clean and admitted to doping. He died in 2004 the year after he retired. Its only recently that people have started to confess and very few who doped in that era have come clean. Stuey O'Grady who won a stage in 98 and wore yellow only "confessed" last year. None of the Irish pros of the era have ever addressed their past.

I'm not trying to make excuses for Pantani but it was a different era and we hope attitudes are different now. But then you think that his manager (Giuseppe Martinelli) is now managing Astana Nibali and Riis is still managing Tinkoff and you wonder how much things have really changed.

Of course the videos of that era aren't the same to watch anymore because ultimately we will never know or understand what we are watching.

SomeFool

What has happened has happened, what a guy to watch, incredible climber - temple hill in cork for me on Friday, can't think of a better spot locally to tip my cap.

AstraMonti

killalanerr wrote: »

despite his untimely death the fact remains that he was a cheat thats what i will remember about him

Do you hold the same opinion for Sean Kelly then?

Morrisseeee

SomeFool wrote: »

- temple hill in cork for me on Friday, can't think of a better spot locally to tip my cap.

Temple Hill :eek:, ye mad fool :pac:, well you'll certainly be 'out of the saddle' just like Pantani

I don't think any other climber attacked and had the same style as Pantani, out of the saddle and in big gears, grinding his way up the cols, unrelenting.

How much of his performances were fueled by illegal means, we'll never know, but I suppose because he was such a different character to the Texan that he occupies a different place in people's minds/thoughts/hearts.

He was a monster in the mountains and a lamb in the media and the fact that he died on Valentine's Day...........alone(?!)..............says it all really.

death1234567

Morrisseeee wrote: »

How much of his performances were fueled by illegal means, we'll never know

I think we do know, all of them.

I used to love watching Pantani but when he won the giro/tour that was the dealbreaker. He was a great climber but to see him holding his own in a timetrial was laughable. It's a shame he cycled at a time when you had to be on drugs, maybe if he was around now things would have been different.

SWL

Morrisseeee wrote: »

Temple Hill :eek:, ye mad fool :pac:, well you'll certainly be 'out of the saddle' just like Pantani

I don't think any other climber attacked and had the same style as Pantani, out of the saddle and in big gears, grinding his way up the cols, unrelenting.

How much of his performances were fueled by illegal means, we'll never know, but I suppose because he was such a different character to the Texan that he occupies a different place in people's minds/thoughts/hearts.

He was a monster in the mountains and a lamb in the media and the fact that he died on Valentine's Day...........alone(?!)..............says it all really.

He was and he wasn't - Pantani was a bit of an odd guy, didn't bully and intimidate people like the Texan, but was very odd and not in an in nice way

robs1

Its unfortunate that all the memories of watching cycling in the 90s onward are now really flawed. everyone loved watching guys attack up mountains and it made the sport amazing. but to respect pantani just because he was a nice cheat is crazy. just like Armstrong he cheated clean riders from winning. just because he wasn't a dickhead should not let him get away being called a flawed genius. he cheated like the rest

nerraw1111

letape wrote: »

I'm not trying to make excuses for Pantani but it was a different era and we hope attitudes are different now. But then you think that his manager (Giuseppe Martinelli) is now managing Astana Nibali and Riis is still managing Tinkoff and you wonder how much things have really changed.

Of course the videos of that era aren't the same to watch anymore because ultimately we will never know or understand what we are watching.

We all understand and know exactly what we're watching. There's no doubt. Those amazing breaks? Doping. Those heroic uphill attacks? Doping.

I cheered him like everyone else, loved his style. But I don't understand how anyone can say he was a good cyclist before he doped or claim that we don't know what we were watching when he stood on his pedals and cycled into the distance. Or it was a different era. It was arguably the dirtiest era in cycling. Almost destroyed the tour. That's Pantani.

There are those who still celebrate him, statues on the mountains etc, presumably on the basis that everyone else was doping and of those, he was fearless and exciting, willing to blow up rather than sit on the wheel. I can understand that to a degree.

ThisRegard

letape wrote: »

Certainly for me who grew up watching him race, there is a lot more to his memory than this.

But everything about watching him race was fraudulent ?!?

SWL

nerraw1111 wrote: »

We all understand and know exactly what we're watching. There's no doubt. Those amazing breaks? Doping. Those heroic uphill attacks? Doping.

I cheered him like everyone else, loved his style. But I don't understand how anyone can say he was a good cyclist before he doped or claim that we don't know what we were watching when he stood on his pedals and cycled into the distance. Or it was a different era. It was arguably the dirtiest era in cycling. Almost destroyed the tour. That's Pantani.

There are those who still celebrate him, statues on the mountains etc, presumably on the basis that everyone else was doping and of those, he was fearless and exciting, willing to blow up rather than sit on the wheel. I can understand that to a degree.

Good point in bold - but it can be argued, many of the cyclists in the pro ranks, are at the apex or close to it of human development, add vector doping and you get the performances of the 1990s - but that is the killer we will never know, was Ullrich the best of his generation again we will never know

Slo_Rida

nerraw1111 wrote: »

presumably on the basis that everyone else was doping and of those, he was fearless and exciting, willing to blow up rather than sit on the wheel. I can understand that to a degree.

Sure that can be said for Lance too. Yes he was prick/dick and everything else people call him on here but he was entertaining and fearless too. So the videos of Lance, Jan, Marco Bjarne are all the same, great craic to watch.
As a relative newcomer to the sport, I fell there are a lot of high horses among cycling fans.

Slo_Rida

AstraMonti wrote: »

Do you hold the same opinion for Sean Kelly then?

Controversial

ThisRegard

Slo_Rida wrote: »

As a relative newcomer to the sport, I fell there are a lot of high horses among cycling fans.

Well as a newcomer you obviously didn't spend years following, watching and admiring cyclists only for it to turn out they were all cheats. Nothing to do with being on a high horse for gods sake.

Slo_Rida

ThisRegard wrote: »

Well as a newcomer you obviously didn't spend years following, watching and admiring cyclists only for it to turn out they were all cheats. Nothing to do with being on a high horse for gods sake.

No I just mean it seems that some cheats are ok and some aren't. Sure I regularly get berated for being a fan of Armstrongs cycling, I think that is wrong. He was a scumbag in other ways but he was a beast on the bike. Wait for the avalance (get it?)!!

ThisRegard

Slo_Rida wrote: »

but he was a beast on the bike. Wait for the avalance (get it?)!!

Ah c'mon, you have to be taking the piss

laraghrider

I think people need to put a little perspective on the comparisons. It's not as simple as saying so if you hate lance you hate pantani because they both cheated. It's not the same as saying if you hate lance and reminisce pantani then your a hypocrite. That's a very George Bush mentality, if you're not with us you're a terrorist!

Did Pantani cheat? Yes he did. Watching his videos back now I feel hallow, not because of the fact that I know they were EPO fueled but because I know the man. Pantani even at a young age was a genius, a tortured genius. A person who struggled with depression and because trapped in a prison of his own world. He lived off the adulation, the only thing that kept him going, he got caught in a spiral of the time unable to survive on his own in the world and ultimately his despression and mental health got the better of him when all that adulation went away. He paid the ultimate price. When I look at those videos I feel so much sympathy for him, what he was going through and about to go through.

Compare that with Lance who built a lie, perpetuated that lie and tore apart anyone who didn't support and fully go along with his lie. He ruined careers and ruined lives to keep his money coming in and to keep his lie going. Ultimately you may say it amounted to the same thing, the adulation, the fame the attention, it's what they both craved. Patani on one hand was a tortured spirit who eventually crumbled. Lance made others crumble and still to this day portrays a sociopath mentality and his only sorry is that of being caught.

RIP Marco, I hope you've found the calm you so needed.

Slo_Rida

ThisRegard wrote: »

Ah c'mon, you have to be taking the piss

I don't want to make this thread about Lance or they'll move these posts to that Lance thread (bin).
I recently looked at Riis's win on the Hautocom (spelling?). Pure entertainment - he falls back through the small group of favourites 10~20 riders. He eyes them all up and then attacks to get rid of some. Riis and repeat another couple of times before he decides, I've had enough, I need to get home to feed the dog and proceeds to ride away from them. Entertainment, yes. That's all that era is good for now if you ask me. And as far as Lance (and Marco) goes, his videos are equally as entertaining. If I was a cycling fan then I would fell very hard done by with the revelations, very hurt.

I also think that there are some feats being achieved in male sprinting and pro-cycling today that will be caught out eventually too. And I will no doubt be feeling hurt then.

Slo_Rida

laraghrider wrote: »

I think people need to put a little perspective on the comparisons. It's not as simple as saying so if you hate lance you hate pantani because they both cheated. It's not the same as saying if you hate lance and reminisce pantani then your a hypocrite. That's a very George Bush mentality, if you're not with us you're a terrorist!

Did Pantani cheat? Yes he did. Watching his videos back now I feel hallow, not because of the fact that I know they were EPO fueled but because I know the man. Pantani even at a young age was a genius, a tortured genius. A person who struggled with depression and because trapped in a prison of his own world. He lived off the adulation, the only thing that kept him going, he got caught in a spiral of the time unable to survive on his own in the world and ultimately his despression and mental health got the better of him when all that adulation went away. He paid the ultimate price. When I look at those videos I feel so much sympathy for him, what he was going through and about to go through.

Compare that with Lance who built a lie, perpetuated that lie and tore apart anyone who didn't support and fully go along with his lie. He ruined careers and ruined lives to keep his money coming in and to keep his lie going. Ultimately you may say it amounted to the same thing, the adulation, the fame the attention, it's what they both craved. Patani on one hand was a tortured spirit who eventually crumbled. Lance made others crumble and still to this day portrays a sociopath mentality and his only sorry is that of being caught.

RIP Marco, I know you've found the calm you so needed.

Yep it's a good question, do we separate the sportsman from the man? Should we adore what "he" or "she" does on the field and leave it at that or should we take personal factors into account. This is why I love sport.

Harrybelafonte

Slo_Rida wrote: »

Yep it's a good question, do we separate the sportsman from the man? Should we adore what "he" or "she" does on the field and leave it at that or should we take personal factors into account. This is why I love sport.

It's down to whether you view sport as pure entertainment.

Slo_Rida

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

It's down to whether you view sport as pure entertainment.

I think I view pro sport as pure entertainment. Possibly because the 2 words I think are contradictory: sport is man vs man in a physical/tactical/mental etc battle and money should not give one man the advantage over the other. Only the very very best can over come this eg Michael Schumacher in F1 but so many "better" sports people are passed over because of the lack of money.

TheBlaaMan

I simply loved to watch Pantani. Flair, flamboyance, do or die....it was hugely entertaining to watch. Now, I don't really know what to feel. I want to retain the good bits about his career and ignore the bad ones, but the flaws were huge and I don't think its really possible to separate out the 'early' and 'later' stages of his career. As best as I can recell, The-Death-Marco-Pantani casts enough doubt on his earliest performances as a junior to seriously question whether any of his results can be above suspicion, and this from an author who was a fan of his.

For me the best that I can believe is that Pantani was as much a victim of the public's expectations and the resulting impact that this had on him, as he was a drug-cheat. Armstong, on the other hand, set out to be the best doper and try to crush anyone who stood in the way of his success. Quite a different beast, even if he would like us to view him more benevolently at this point.

Slo_Rida

I must flick through some other threads and see does Lance get in there inexplicably as well!!!!!!!

AstraMonti

The only common thing between Pantani and Armstrong is the use of EPO. Does this make them equal in your eyes to deserve the same response?

ThisRegard

Slo_Rida wrote: »

.....Pure entertainment.....

I agree, it's entertainment, in the same way WWF/WWE is. But you can't say such and such a rider is a beast or was great because it was all a fake.

And I don't get this idea that Pantani wasn't as bad as Armstrong because he was a tortured genius. Personality wise Armtrong was worse in this methods of trying to destroy anyone that questioned him, but their ultimate aim was the same, to cheat.

Harrybelafonte

ThisRegard wrote: »

I agree, it's entertainment, in the same way WWF/WWE is. But you can't say such and such a rider is a beast or was great because it was all a fake.

I hate to break it to you but WWF/WEE is fake and not a sport, but a soap opera for testosterone filled teens or men of questionable mental maturity... a bit life MMA really (the soap opera part, definitely not the fake part).

Of course you cans ay someone is a beast. Pantani wasn't some couch potato who decided to score a load of EPO and get into cycling a bike, nor was he a triathlete who figured he could make it big. It was his life and his family's life and as far as I'm concerned he died for it.

Cheating is/was/will be a part of cycling forever, whatever way it happens. It happens because we're human, but what cycling encompasses above all sports is the attitude that winning is not the be all and end all, that some class and sportsmanship still has its place and that the first thing you do after a race is shake the hand of the man who beat you.

Tennis does that too... I know...

I'm sure people will give me examples of bad behaviour amongst cyclists... but they're in the minority and I can give a lot more proving the above than negating it.

Actually, lets bring Lance in here again. Did Pantani gob on someone who had come out about doping in cycling? Was he that kind of person.

ford2600

Pantani's story is such a tragedy.

Much more to be learned from asking questions of his life, illness, addiction and death than making judgements.

ThisRegard

Harrybelafonte wrote: »

I hate to break it to you but WWF/WEE is fake and not a sport, but a soap opera for testosterone filled teens or men of questionable mental maturity... a bit life MMA really (the soap opera part, definitely not the fake part).

And pro cycling wasn't for the most part during that era ? But it wasn't the teens or men with questionable mental maturity that were testosterone filled but the cyclists.

You can't have threads that on the one hand say that results from a certain era should be written from the history books, but then say how great a cyclist was who has many questionable results associated with him.

Harrybelafonte

ThisRegard wrote: »

And pro cycling wasn't for the most part during that era ? But it wasn't the teens or men with questionable mental maturity that were testosterone filled but the cyclists.

You can't have threads that on the one hand say that results from a certain era should be written from the history books, but then say how great a cyclist was who has many questionable results associated with him.

Nobody is saying that. We're saying he was more that some very bad decisions and a load of drugs.

You go ahead and grumble and gripe about the era. Dismiss it completely if you like, but right now, I'm still trying to find little slivers of greatness in it, beyond performances, but more of the opportunities we missed to see some greats perform without assistance, to see what we missed really.

12 sprocket

ford2600 wrote: »

Pantani's story is such a tragedy.

Much more to be learned from asking questions of his life, illness, addiction and death than making judgements.

This is probably the most worthwile contribution to this thread

shutup

I didn't know anything about pro cycling before this thread.
I have learned that :
Armstrong and Pantani were the only two who doped.
Doping is the only thing you need to do to win. No training, talent, determination, heart or tactics are needed.
Taking a cough bottle to treat a genuine illness makes you a cheat. And that should be brought up 30 years later to compare you to an evil bully.
Doping only happens in cycling.
Doping in cycling is finished.

I hate cheating so with all the above in mind I think I will turn my attention away from cycling and watch Spanish football, rugby, the Olympics, mma and tennis.

Slo_Rida

shutup wrote: »

I hate cheating so with all the above in mind I think I will turn my attention away from cycling and watch Spanish football, rugby, the Olympics, mma and tennis.

Turn it away from these threads while you're at it!!!!

shutup

Slo_Rida wrote: »

Turn it away from these threads while you're at it!!!!

Why?

Slo_Rida

shutup wrote: »

Why?

Shutup.
You said you learned from this this thread that cheating is over in cycling despite the fact that one poster specifically said there will always be cheating. That's just one reason, there are more but that's a more polite one. I'm done.