View Full Version : Phil Andserson and his last years as a pro
Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
race the last few months (he was left of the team) and did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In
other words, he raced for the last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
last race.
Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going to repeat what I remember
unless I read it here first.
"Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> writes:
> Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> race the last few months (he was left of the team) and did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In
> other words, he raced for the last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
> last race.
>
> Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going to repeat what I
> remember unless I read it here first.
Maybe let it drop mate. No need to write Verses and Verses about it or we'll be as bad in here as
the News of the World or the Transatlantic counterpart, the National Enquirer.
Le vent a Dos
--
Davey Crockett
Nick Burns wrote:
> Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> race the last few months (he was left of the team) and did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In
> other words, he raced for the last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
> last race.
>
> Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going to repeat what I
> remember unless I read it here first.
>
>
Might be something in Rupert Guiness' book Aussie Aussie Aussie! Oui! Oui! Oui! as there's nods to
Phil's career in there.
"Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<3f2c88f1$0$28877$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>...
> Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> race the last few months (he was left of the team) and did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In
> other words, he raced for the last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
> last race.
>
> Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going to repeat what I
> remember unless I read it here first.
For the reason that the peloton was going much faster circa 1994 he wanted to protect his future
health by not participating - if you get my drift.
"Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<3f2c88f1$0$28877$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com>...
> Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> race the last few months (he was left of the team) and did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In
> other words, he raced for the last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
> last race.
>
> Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going to repeat what I
> remember unless I read it here first.
I remember Ochowicz (sp?) making some remark to the effect that their team wasn't a charity, and
that they had no responsibility regarding Phil Anderson's end of career. One of the less pleasant
moments in pro cycling.
-ilan
"Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2c88f1$0$28877$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com...
> Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> race the last few months (he was left of the team)
and
> did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In other words, he raced for the last time when he and
> everyone else was unaware that it would be his last race.
>
> Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going
to
> repeat what I remember unless I read it here first.
I think Motorola was looking for a more clean-cut image and he refused to cut his ponytail.
"Brian Phillips" <bumphilNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:9veXa.130738$Io.11131528@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>
> "Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3f2c88f1$0$28877$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com...
> > Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he
retired?
> > He was not allowed to race the last few months (he was left of the team)
> and
> > did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In other words, he raced for
the
> > last time when he and everyone else was unaware that it would be his
last
> > race.
> >
> > Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not
going
> to
> > repeat what I remember unless I read it here first.
>
> I think Motorola was looking for a more clean-cut image and he refused to cut his ponytail.
He raced for Motorola from 1991 - 1994. That is almost four full seasons. He was able to bring them
a lot of UCI points and wins. He also had an awesome career, including in his last year. I was
disappointed with the way he was treated.
Sean Yates at least was able to plan his last race and got to celebrate a little bit (in Japan for
the Japan Cup, 1996). I am trying to remember him too, and I think Lance had already reported his
cancer by the time Sean went to the Japan Cup. I will never forget the day Lance had that press
conference. It was shocking. He was the hope of the future for American cycling at that time and all
of the sudden it was not clear whether he would even live.
I think Motorola was looking for a more clean-cut image and he refused to cut his ponytail.
whuuuuttt?????
It's hard to hide the doping evidence with long hair.
ALTERNATIVE DOPING CONTROL FOR CORTICOIDS BY HAIR ANALYSIS WITH LC/MS
P. Kintz, V. Cirimele, J.S. Raul, J.P. Goullé, B. Ludes
Institut de Médecine Légale, 11 rue Humann, F-67000 Strasbourg, France
Cortisone and hydrocortisone, naturally occuring homones, influence metabolism, inflammation, electrolyte and water balance …Their synthetic derivatives are used in therapeutic for their anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive actions. They are used in certain sports to improve the performances of the athletes (euphoria, motor activity).
Repetitive abuse of corticosteroids by athletes can be demonstrated by segmental analysis along the hair shaft, in contrast to ponctual urinalysis. A single treatment of about 1 week will positive a single 1-cm segment, while long-term abuse will lead to the identification of the corticoïd (s) in several segments. For such an application, particularly in case of longitudinal survey of athletes, hair analysis appears as the solution of choice to document doping practices. However, this procedure does not allow the discrimination between local administration, that is permitted with a medical prescription, and systemic use, that is banned.
Hair strands were washed in methylene chloride, pulverized in a ball mill and 100 mg of the powdered hair were incubated in 1 ml Soerensen buffer, pH 7.6 for 16 h at 40 °C, in presence of 5 ng cortisol-d3 used as internal standard. Purification of the incubation medium was achieved on SPE C18 Isolute extraction columns followed by an alkaline liquid-liquid extraction with diethylether. The eluate was evaporated to dryness and resuspended in 25 µl of acetonitrile. The chromatography was operated on a Nucleosil C18 1 mm column using a linear gradient of acetonitrile from 30 to 70% in 15 min. The detector was a Perkin Elmer Sciex API 100 mass spectrometer.
Physiological concentrations (n=25) of cortisone and cortisol were in the range 2 to 132 (mean 42 pg/mg) and 2 to 57 pg/mg (mean 15 pg/mg), respectively. Concentrations were not dependant on hair colour (probably due to the absence of a nitrogen atom in the structure), but seemed to be age-dependant.
A general screening procedure was established to test 10 corticosteroids (triamcinolone, prednisolone, prednisone, methylprednisone, cortisone, cortisol, beta- and dexa-methasone, flumethasone and beclomethasone), with LODs in the range 1 to 30 pg/mg.
Prednisone was identified in the hair (30 à 130 pg/mg, mean 65 pg/mg) of 9/10 patients daily treated by Cortancyl® at 5 to 60 mg/day, in an apparent dose-concentration relationship.
A single therapeutic treatment can be documented, as demonstrated by the unique identification of betamethasone in the hair, at 4.7 pg/mg, of a subject receiving for 9 consecutive days 4 mg of the drug. By segmental analyses, no migration of betamethasone was observed in the hair shaft.
Finally, in case of 2 cyclists, segmental hair analyses demonstrated chronic abuse of triamcinolone and betamethasone over several months.
A former professional rider who was a contemporary of Armstrong's at
Motorola from 1992 to 1996 tells a different story. Now retired from
the sport, this former professional agreed to speak on the basis that
his name would not be used. Should it become necessary, though, he
will come forward and stand up for his account of the Motorola years.
"The team results in 1994 were not impressive and '95 started off the
same. We had access to the same training as other teams, the same
equipment; we ate the same food, slept the same number of hours but,
in races, we were not as competitive. The picture was becoming clear
for the upcoming Tour de France: we were going to have to give in and
join the EPO race.
"Lance was a key spokesperson when EPO was the topic. From the riders'
point of view, we felt the mounting pressure not only from within the
team but also from what was being said and written about us as a team.
No one starts out wanting to dope but you become a victim of the
sport." As well as believing Motorola was clean, Armstrong says he has
proof that US Postal runs a clean programme. He points to the team's
three weeks of drug-free urine at last year's Tour de France. To the
suggestion that the Tour's tests find only detectable drugs, he
replies that there will always be "cynics and sceptics and zealots".
We talk about Prentice Steffen, team doctor for US Postal in 1996, the
year before Armstrong joined the team. Steffen had been with the team
since 1993, when it was Subaru-Montgomery, and continued as team
doctor in the first year of US Postal's involvement. With Postal's
backing came the ambition to compete against Europe's best. In 1996
they entered the Tour of Switzerland.
"We were wiped out," said Steffen. "Two of my riders approached me
saying they wanted to 'talk about the medical programme'. It was said
that as a team, we weren't able to get to where we wanted to go with
what I was doing for them. I said, 'Well, right now I am doing
everything I can.' They might have come back with 'more could be done'
and I said, 'Yeah, I understand, but I am not going to be involved in
that'."
Steffen is sure he was being asked to help two riders to dope. After
that informal discussion, relations cooled between the doctor and his
riders. Four months later, a message was left on Steffen's voicemail
saying the team no longer needed him.
In November 1996, Steffen received a letter from firm Keesal, Young
and Logan, attorneys for the US Postal team. The letter said his
suspicions about his departure were incorrect but he would be held
responsible for his comments if he made them public. Until now,
Steffen has not spoken out in public. Armstrong says he is surprised
by the doctor's story. But is it not a serious accusation against the
team? "If it's so serious and so sincere, I would think I would have
heard that [before now]."
That is not the rumor I was talking about. Never mind, I was really trying to put some pieces
together that I could not remember.
I was trying to remember the "waves" of riders departing and when they left. I think Phinney and
Kiefel were the first to go. In fact, Phinney never ever made it to the Motorola team for its first
year. I think Kiefel last one year. Steve Bauer was back and forth several times...I just can't
pull it all together to get the story straight. IIRC, Bauer, Anderson and a few others left under
strange circumstances and the driving force to get them out was guess who. As Lance "matured",
which in this case really only means that he started getting better race results ('93 was his first
full pro season and a break out year for him), Och' seemed to be changing the team roster to focus
on its new star.
FWIW, I have seen this claim before, it is several years old.
"never_doped" <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3f2db5fd_1@news.chariot.net.au...
> A former professional rider who was a contemporary of Armstrong's at Motorola from 1992 to 1996
> tells a different story. Now retired from the sport, this former professional agreed to speak on
> the basis that his name would not be used. Should it become necessary, though, he will come
> forward and stand up for his account of the Motorola years.
>
> "The team results in 1994 were not impressive and '95 started off the same. We had access to the
> same training as other teams, the same equipment; we ate the same food, slept the same number of
> hours but, in races, we were not as competitive. The picture was becoming clear for the upcoming
> Tour de France: we were going to have to give in and join the EPO race.
>
> "Lance was a key spokesperson when EPO was the topic. From the riders' point of view, we felt the
> mounting pressure not only from within the team but also from what was being said and written
> about us as a team. No one starts out wanting to dope but you become a victim of the sport." As
> well as believing Motorola was clean, Armstrong says he has proof that US Postal runs a clean
> programme. He points to the team's three weeks of drug-free urine at last year's Tour de France.
> To the suggestion that the Tour's tests find only detectable drugs, he replies that there will
> always be "cynics and sceptics and zealots".
>
> We talk about Prentice Steffen, team doctor for US Postal in 1996, the year before Armstrong
> joined the team. Steffen had been with the team since 1993, when it was Subaru-Montgomery, and
> continued as team doctor in the first year of US Postal's involvement. With Postal's backing came
> the ambition to compete against Europe's best. In 1996 they entered the Tour of Switzerland.
>
> "We were wiped out," said Steffen. "Two of my riders approached me saying they wanted to 'talk
> about the medical programme'. It was said that as a team, we weren't able to get to where we
> wanted to go with what I was doing for them. I said, 'Well, right now I am doing everything I
> can.' They might have come back with 'more could be done' and I said, 'Yeah, I understand, but I
> am not going to be involved in that'."
>
> Steffen is sure he was being asked to help two riders to dope. After that informal discussion,
> relations cooled between the doctor and his riders. Four months later, a message was left on
> Steffen's voicemail saying the team no longer needed him.
>
> In November 1996, Steffen received a letter from firm Keesal, Young and Logan, attorneys for the
> US Postal team. The letter said his suspicions about his departure were incorrect but he would be
> held responsible for his comments if he made them public. Until now, Steffen has not spoken out in
> public. Armstrong says he is surprised by the doctor's story. But is it not a serious accusation
> against the team? "If it's so serious and so sincere, I would think I would have heard that
> [before now]."
>
>
>
> --
> >--------------------------<
> Posted via cyclingforums.com http://www.cyclingforums.com (http://www.cyclingforums.com/)
"never_doped" <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3f2db5fd_1@news.chariot.net.au...
>
> We talk about Prentice Steffen, team doctor for US Postal in 1996, the year before Armstrong
> joined the team. Steffen had been with the team since 1993, when it was Subaru-Montgomery, and
> continued as team doctor in the first year of US Postal's involvement. With Postal's backing came
> the ambition to compete against Europe's best. In 1996 they entered the Tour of Switzerland.
>
> "We were wiped out," said Steffen. "Two of my riders approached me saying they wanted to 'talk
> about the medical programme'. It was said that as a team, we weren't able to get to where we
> wanted to go with what I was doing for them. I said, 'Well, right now I am doing everything I
> can.' They might have come back with 'more could be done' and I said, 'Yeah, I understand, but I
> am not going to be involved in that'."
>
> Steffen is sure he was being asked to help two riders to dope. After that informal discussion,
> relations cooled between the doctor and his riders. Four months later, a message was left on
> Steffen's voicemail saying the team no longer needed him.
>
> In November 1996, Steffen received a letter from firm Keesal, Young and Logan, attorneys for the
> US Postal team. The letter said his suspicions about his departure were incorrect but he would be
> held responsible for his comments if he made them public. Until now, Steffen has not spoken out in
> public. Armstrong says he is surprised by the doctor's story. But is it not a serious accusation
> against the team? "If it's so serious and so sincere, I would think I would have heard that
> [before now]."
One of the reasons we don't hear much about doping in major domestic professional sports (football,
baseball, basketball, hockey) is there is a thing here called doctor-patient privilege.
Doctors are not supposed to reveal the nature of their dealings with their patients unless the
patient gives their consent. The doctor-patient privilege is thrown aside in certain criminal
situations (Menendez Brothers
psychiatric interviews for instance), but in the case of performance enhancing substances, it almost
certainly holds. Breaking the rules of a sports governing body is not against the law.
I'll guess that the statements that Steffen made was unethical. He is not supposed to reveal
anything about his patients, even if it is a simple vitamin shot, without their consent.
never_doped <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3f2db5fd_1@news.chariot.net.au>...
> A former professional rider who was a contemporary of Armstrong's at Motorola from 1992 to 1996
> tells a different story. Now retired from the sport, this former professional agreed to speak on
> the basis that his name would not be used. Should it become necessary, though, he will come
> forward and stand up for his account of the Motorola years.
>
> "The team results in 1994 were not impressive and '95 started off the same. We had access to the
> same training as other teams, the same equipment; we ate the same food, slept the same number of
> hours but, in races, we were not as competitive. The picture was becoming clear for the upcoming
> Tour de France: we were going to have to give in and join the EPO race.
>
Following the '94 or '95 season there was an interview with Lance in Velonews. The talk turned to
the Postal squad's relatively poor results. Lance said something to the effect that everyone else
was getting faster and Postal would have to reexamine their approach.
Anyone have that issue? I think it was the one reporting on Lance and Julie Furtado receiving the
Korbel award as best US cyclists or something of the sort.
"Brian Phillips" <bumphilNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<9veXa.130738$Io.11131528@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> "Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3f2c88f1$0$28877$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com...
> > Does anyone else remember when Phil got hosed by Motorola when he retired? He was not allowed to
> > race the last few months (he was left of the team)
> and
> > did not even get a "last race" as a pro. In other words, he raced for the last time when he and
> > everyone else was unaware that it would be his last race.
> >
> > Does anyone remember the rumor(s) about why this happened? I am not going
> to
> > repeat what I remember unless I read it here first.
>
> I think Motorola was looking for a more clean-cut image and he refused to cut his ponytail.
Never_Doped is on the right track. From the horse's mouth, the cooling towards Anderson in 1994 was
because he refused to participate resulting in him being 'sent to Coventry' by his team and a great
rider forced to bow out of professional cycling in an undeserving manner.
brigids@swbell.net (jumphress) wrote in message
news:<5ee33c0c.0308032233.533c88e8@posting.google.com>...
> never_doped <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3f2db5fd_1@news.chariot.net.au>...
> > A former professional rider who was a contemporary of Armstrong's at Motorola from 1992 to 1996
> > tells a different story. Now retired from the sport, this former professional agreed to speak on
> > the basis that his name would not be used. Should it become necessary, though, he will come
> > forward and stand up for his account of the Motorola years.
> >
> > "The team results in 1994 were not impressive and '95 started off the same. We had access to the
> > same training as other teams, the same equipment; we ate the same food, slept the same number of
> > hours but, in races, we were not as competitive. The picture was becoming clear for the upcoming
> > Tour de France: we were going to have to give in and join the EPO race.
> >
> Following the '94 or '95 season there was an interview with Lance in Velonews. The talk turned to
> the Postal squad's relatively poor results. Lance said something to the effect that everyone else
> was getting faster and Postal would have to reexamine their approach.
>
> Anyone have that issue? I think it was the one reporting on Lance and Julie Furtado receiving the
> Korbel award as best US cyclists or something of the sort.
Pardon me, "Postal" should read "Motorola."
"Nick Burns" <chris@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3f2dd0b3$0$28879$a32e20b9@news.nntpservers.com...
> I was trying to remember the "waves" of riders departing and when they
left.
> I think Phinney and Kiefel were the first to go. In fact, Phinney never
ever
> made it to the Motorola team for its first year. I think Kiefel last one year. Steve Bauer was
> back and forth several times...I just can't pull it all together to get the story straight. IIRC,
> Bauer, Anderson and a few others left under strange circumstances and the driving force to get
> them out was guess who.
FWIW, I was there on Motorola in 1991, and quit Europe in the fall of that year with another year
left on my contract. There was intense turmoil in the team at that time, with a lot of politics and
in-fighting. Morale was very low across the board. There was a changing of the guard, and it was
deliberate - if not exactly controlled - from team management. The old 7-11 guys (Phinney, Kiefel,
etc) were getting pushed out by the Euros (Lauritzen, Yates) who were getting pressure from
management to keep delivering. Some of them saw the writing on the wasll and split (Phinney and
Keifel to Coors Light, etc). Others hung on until they were forced out, sometimes in less-than-ideal
circumstances (Anderson, Bauer). There were incidents in races where older guys, who were trying to
stay on the top of the heap despite poor results, even stopped younger guys from performing. It
wasn't exactly a nurturing environment from my perspective.
Och knew he had to build a European team with star performers, and he was right. The novelty of the
American dream team had kind of worn off, because there wasn't enought depth in America to keep
supplying American boys. So it had to change. Och didn't even know he had Lance coming in a couple
years. But his intuition and leadership was right on, because gradually he prepared a team that was
really the foundation of the current USPS.
On an unrelated note, the pressure to "step up" to a program was intense in 1991 - though not from
within the team (i.e., I was never EVER offered anything suspicious from Max or any of the team
doctors). But everybody knew the **** worked, and in just a couple of years it would become
acceptable practice. But by then I was gone.
Scott
>Never_Doped is on the right track. From the horse's mouth, the cooling towards Anderson in 1994 was
>because he refused to participate resulting in him being 'sent to Coventry' by his team and a great
>rider forced to bow out of professional cycling in an undeserving manner.
Yeah, although no one will have me believe that Phil wasn't "staying competitive" in the 80s, it's
probably that the products were changing and he didn't feel it was worth taking chances with his
future health at it was when he was getting started.
"Scott" <smckin@pacbell.net> wrote in message news:QdyXa.1251$hv6.746@newssvr22.news.prodigy.com...
>
> FWIW, I was there on Motorola in 1991, and quit Europe in the fall of that year with another year
> left on my contract. There was intense turmoil in
the
> team at that time, with a lot of politics and in-fighting. Morale was very low across the board.
> There was a changing of the guard, and it was deliberate -
<snip>
Thanks for relating this. It's nice to see someone post who actually has firsthand knowledge because
1) it's informative and 2) it has a tendency to stop newbies from posting random speculation ("it
sounds logical to me, therefore it must be true").
Scott, this was obvious at the OTC going back to 1988.
Give one valid reason that Carl Sundquist didn't make the pursuit team except as an alternate and despite his good record and domination wasn't the AQ for the individual.
It was the f*cking USCF and coaches that set up this time for a duoble peak that gave us such ****ty results.
How in the hell is a rider suppose to peak for the trials and then the Olympics 4-5 weeks later?
Same thing with the TTT, not a single damn reason that Frey, Shaefor, Bostick and Maxon, Resh, Paulin etc*
These are the same coaches that butt-buddied with all of the juniors like it was some kind of Pol-Pot regime of cycling.
*(I am doing this from memory, sad thing is when I google these words "1988 olympics cyclists USA" all I get is a bunch of articles and references to doping)
In article <3f2f3ad6$1_1@news.chariot.net.au>, never_doped <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote:
> How in the hell is a rider suppose to peak for the trials and then the Olympics 4-5 weeks later?
I agree, but what other way is there? If you choose based on past results you might get somebody who
won't be the fastest at the Olympics. Can you make the choice a week or two before the Olympics? I
think the biggest joke was the 2000 Olympic Trials. Way too early and almost nobody qualified there.
-WG
"warren" <warren@usvhremove.com> wrote in message news:040820032214088715%warren@usvhremove.com...
> In article <3f2f3ad6$1_1@news.chariot.net.au>, never_doped <never_doped@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > How in the hell is a rider suppose to peak for the trials and then the Olympics 4-5 weeks later?
>
> I agree, but what other way is there?
Copy the Australians.
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
