One of the most enduring images in my mind of the Tour in the early 90s is of the monumental Stage 13 of the 1992 edition. Riders covered 255km over some of the most brutal and iconic mountain passes the race had ever witnessed, finishing at the Italian ski resort of Sestriere. The tifosi were out in force that day, with numbers estimated in the hundreds of thousands, cheering on their idol Claudio Chiappucci as he went on a day-long solo mission to take victory. Such was the magnitude of the crowd that a human tunnel formed on the final climb of the day, with the lead motorcycles unable to forge their way through the throng in places, with Il Diablo himself forced to overtake them, frantically waving his arms at his adoring fans to clear a path to the summit and an incredible win.
Some seven and three-quarter hours after setting out from Saint Gervais in France, Chiappucci stamped his name in the history books while leaving in his wake all the GC contenders, including Indurain, Bugno, Hampsten and Fignon. A visibly distressed and outclassed Greg LeMond struggled in some 42 minutes behind, signalling the beginning of the end of his race, and his career. But just 1:45 behind Chiappucci came another Italian, one that even the staunchest of tifosi may have had trouble identifying.
Franco Vona had been just another Italian who'd had some strong showings in his native country's Grand Tour, with a stage win and a 2nd in the Young Rider classification in 1988. The following year was unremarkable, before he seemed to drop off the radar in 90 and 91, with a dearth of results bar a mountain stage win at the Tour de Suisse. 1992, however, saw him suddenly at the front of affairs in the mountains of the Giro, taking two stages and 6th on GC. To the wider cycling audience though, it would be the Tour where he would really make his mark.
Having left the small Jolly team in 91, Vona found himself on the powerful GB-MG squad along with the likes of Museeuw, Ballerini, Tchmil, Cipollini and another 'great improver WHERE `id` = Zenon Jaskula. With being on a big team comes some of the benefits that money and power bring, including advanced 'training programs' and access to doctors and coaches who could realise a rider's potential through means the riders might not have previously encountered. Vona's new-found powers of recovery would shine the very next day at l'Alpe d'Huez, taking another second place, this time behind Andy Hampsten. Not even Chiappucci and Big Mig could match him, and Vona would eventually finish the Tour in 11th place.
Vona was clearly a man for the mountains though, and a weak time trial ability saw him thrust into a support role for Jaskula in 93, when the Pole made his own meteroic rise to the Tour podium. The Italian rode the next three Tours, but would never again reach the heights of 92, and he would end his career with another small Italian team, AKI-Gipiemme in 1996.
These days, Vona works as a cycling guide for the Silva Splendid Hotel in Fiuggi, central Italy. They describe him as their “pride and joy”, and state he will “disclose you the secrets of professional cycling”. I wonder just how many secrets he is willing to reveal?
[dmalbum path=”/velominati.com/content/Photo Galleries/brettok@velominati.com/Franco Vona/”/]
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
I love your Evanescent Riders of the 90's articles. Well put and informative. We should also develop the Unsung Hardmen thread. Good work. Thanks bro.
Yeah, another nice post. Well done.
Speaking of 'sudden improvements, 'advanced training programs' and realising a rider's potential through other 'methods', I have just read David Walsh's "From Lance to Landis". A compelling - albeit depressing - read. Next time someone urges you to read "It's Not About the Bike", get them to read Walsh's book and then ask them if they still recommend the Armstrong one. Let me know if you want to borrow it.
@Geof
@Marko
Cheers guys... yeah Geof, I'd love to have a read. I haven't even looked at the other book you loaned me yet, but I'd rather have a look at the Walsh one.
One reason why I enjoy spending time here is that I always learn something and everything is a good read..Thanks Brett.
Your articles, especially these Evanescent Riders ones, always remind me what a crap writer I am. This one, in particular, is a masterpiece. Awesome.
I remember this guy, albeit a bit vaguely. Man, that GB team was killer, though. And those Bianchis...mama mia!. One of the things I remember most of this guy is the way Ligget would yell his name, "Franco VONAH!"
Awesome piece.
So a bit tangential but this post got me thinking. My velomihottie is Italian. Her extended kin hale from Pontremoli Italy. The Giro rode through that town this year. So I googled her last name with the word cyclist added. I thought I wouldn't be surprised if there was someone with her last name who was pro after seeing her climbing technique. It's classic lighter-than-air dancing-on-the-pedals Italian. Turns out, there is a former pro with the same last name but he is French (must be from the south). May be extended, who knows, but I tried.
@Marko
Dude, that's awesome. Those Euro families are very inter-related, it's not far-fetched that they are relations.
Doesn't she ride 650cc wheels? That is nuts. Mine also has this infuriating natural climbing technique, although for a rider as small as she, I would intuit that she'd spin higher, but she is more of a Pantani-style climber.
Back to the point, these "Evanescent" riders...I am seriously looking forward to the next edition already. Who will Brett pick? I don't know, but it will be good.
Many people might look back at this and say, "Jeeze, that wasn't real bike racing" and they would be right. But the field was so juiced, the only thing not real about it was the speed. The racing between riders going tete-en-tete was still level. I, for one, just love good bike racing. I hope for a clean sport - and want one. But mostly because I feel bad for riders who are pressured into doping, and for unhealthy situations they put themselves into. The racing...well, the racing is good to watch, with or without the drugs.
@frank
Stop it now, Frank, every time I read something you wrote I think that I need to brush up a bit! Crap, you ain't...
Every time I do one of these articles, I think "what if I'm wrong, what if these guys weren't juiced to the eyeballs and I'm slandering them unwittingly?" But then I watch a video of them driving it up the nastiest of Cols at warp speed, and I feel somewhat vindicated.
And for sure guys like Vona and Jaskula were obviously talented to even become pro riders, but the magic juice certainly took them to a whole other level. While I'm researching their palmares, there are always spooky parallels that seem just to good to be purely coincidental; timelines, teams etc, it all points at the same conclusions.
@frank @brett
This whole argument - "it was bad, but at least it was bad in a level-playing-field kind of way" - is interesting in light of an instant-message exchange which David Walsh (in "From Lance to Landis") claims took place between Frankie Andreu and Jonathan Vaughters (in 2005?). The alleged exchange seems to indicate that Credit Agricole (and by implication other teams, but not USPS) were actually trying to ride clean(ish) (at least from some time after 1998). From memory, Walsh claims that Vaughters is saying he was surprised to find, when he got to Credit Agricole, that they didn't dope at all. (The reported exchange also includes an apparent acknowledgment by JV of previous familiarity with "the houtsauce".) Not sure how that squares with the "level playing field" argument. Maybe it doesn't change it - the riders were all grown-ups and they could presumably have chosen to be clean or to dope, and in that sense there was a level playing field. But on the other hand it suggests that there may not have been a level playing field (i.e. if some teams were trying to make more of an effort than others to ride clean(er)).
Of course, Walsh's book may not be accurate, it is focussed on Big Tex rather than the peloton in general, we don't know all the facts, innocent until proven guilty (in a court of law, not merely in the court of (rapidly-swinging-away-from-your-sorry-arse) public opinion), etc. So, we should not jump to conclusions.
But, if it was the case that USPS was at the forefront of doping even when others were trying not to be, then ... well ... COTHO, indeed.
Incidentally, the alleged IM exchange also contains a claim that LA and JB tipped a bag of Landis' rest-day blood down the toilet, so that he'd ride poorly. (I think Walsh speculates this may have been to punish Landis for defecting to Phonak). If that's true then ... well... do we need a new term? "COTUHO" (where "u" is for "unsurpassed")?
@Good Geofelephant
I'm not sure I've endorsed the 'level playing field' view with regards to EPO. I read somewhere recently how EPO benefitted some more than others, turning 'donkeys into racehorses' so to speak. That's how these evanescent riders came to the fore so quickly, then faded away just as rapidly.
And that's the effect it had on Armstrong, who couldn't climb a ladder or beat time with a stick in his pre-cancer guise.