30 for 30 - Slaying the Badger

[Old School]

Did anyone watch the ESPN documentary last night? It was about the 1986 Tour de France and the battle within the LaVie Claire team.

I thought it had some really good interviews...coaches, riders (good to see Andy Hampsten), other folks who lived it with the riders.

I can admit this is when I really got involved in watching the sport, and it was because of the coverage received in the States, which was non existent to those of us who only had basic TV back then.

I just wondered how you fans thought felt about the production.

I thought it was done well, with the interviews making the show that much better.

 

[Race Radio]

Great documentary. Very well made.

It will replay this weekend if anyone missed it

 

[masking_agent]

please do, how do us canadians get to watch it ? online I assume ?

I'm really eager to watch it as I was watching that battle live every weekend on CBS sports.. John Tesh and Phil Liggett.. Great old days ..

 

[Carols]

I dvred it and look forward to reliving that race! Happy to hear it is well done

 

[Afrank]

I really wanted to watch it but forgot and missed it.

Glad to hear it will replay. RR, what day and time? Can't find it on their schedule online.

 

[MellowJohnny]

Is it available to download anywhere?

I have read the book and its great.

 

[Race Radio]

I really wanted to watch it but forgot and missed it.

Glad to hear it will replay. RR, what day and time? Can't find it on their schedule online.

It appears it is on ESPN 2 at 4:30 AM PST on Saturday

 

[djpbaltimore]

Great documentary. Very well made.

It will replay this weekend if anyone missed it

Agreed. I thought it was really interesting. I was not quite old enough to follow the 80s cycling scene, so I enjoyed hearing about that era. I did find it surprising that it started out by talking about Lance, but I guess that context is almost inescapable at that point.

LeMond looks a lot better at the TDF now than he does in the documentary. The contrast between him and Hampsten was amazing. The latter looks like he could hop on the bike and jump back into the peloton, while Greg... does not. He had some kind of accident and spent the whole series of interviews in a back brace, so that was part of the problem.

I thought Hinault was portrayed fairly. Their coach on LVC is the one that comes off looking like a bit of an idiot.

 

[Afrank]

It appears it is on ESPN 2 at 4:30 AM PST on Saturday

Cool, thanks very much. Gonna have to make to to dvr it.

 

[Old School]

I thought Hinault was portrayed fairly. Their coach on LVC is the one that comes off looking like a bit of an idiot.

That's so true! Especially when Andy said that the coach told him to "go win the Tour" during that one attack. What?!?!? Amazing story.

I wish Steve Bauer had been interviewed as well.

I don't know if he'll ever get the credit he deserved, but Greg was the original champion to us 1980 kids on our 10 speeds. He suffered unfortunately, due to Lance marginalizing Greg's accomplishments.

 

[Race Radio]

Agreed. I thought it was really interesting. I was not quite old enough to follow the 80s cycling scene, so I enjoyed hearing about that era. I did find it surprising that it started out by talking about Lance, but I guess that context is almost inescapable at that point.

LeMond looks a lot better at the TDF now than he does in the documentary. The contrast between him and Hampsten was amazing. The latter looks like he could hop on the bike and jump back into the peloton, while Greg... does not. He had some kind of accident and spent the whole series of interviews in a back brace, so that was part of the problem.

I thought Hinault was portrayed fairly. Their coach on LVC is the one that comes off looking like a bit of an idiot.

Paul Köchli comes off as a complete weirdo. Richard's book goes into more detail. After reading it you come away with the impression that much of it was Paul's fault and it is easy to understand Hinault.....maybe not agree with him but understand why he did what he did.

I have talked with Greg and Kathy several times about Hinault and they are are always very clear that with the exception of those couple of weeks Hinault was an excellent guy. Saw them at the Tour together several years ago and they were very friendly.

Greg was in a very bad car crash right before filming. He has lost a lot of weight since and is riding a bunch. He can still crush it

 

[Oldman]

Paul Köchli comes off as a complete weirdo. Richard's book goes into more detail. After reading it you come away with the impression that much of it was Paul's fault and it is easy to understand Hinault.....maybe not agree with him but understand why he did what he did.

I have talked with Greg and Kathy several times about Hinault and they are are always very clear that with the exception of those couple of weeks Hinault was an excellent guy. Saw them at the Tour together several years ago and they were very friendly.

Greg was in a very bad car crash right before filming. He has lost a lot of weight since and is riding a bunch. He can still crush it

I haven't had the pleasure of riding with him but folks that worked with him said he was still an incredible descender.

Really notable thing was rider cadence on hills when you watch the coverage. Power riders inevitably ruled since no one seemed to use triple rings or other means to "spin". IMO the team directors and coaches had much more direct influence on the riders as compared to today and kept much of strategy and training in the Dark Ages. Riders now all seem to have independent coaching that encourages evolution...and parity.

Have to wonder how natural specimens like Hinault and Lemond would compare to the likes of today's riders? Could they lose the weight necessary to climb like the current peloton? Could the current peloton come close to the abilities we see today without enhancement?

 

[perico]

I think the problem Koechli had was with the English. He's fluent, but I don't know how well he speaks it. He's a brilliant guy and strategist.

 

[Race Radio]

I think the problem Koechli had was with the English. He's fluent, but I don't know how well he speaks it. He's a brilliant guy and strategist.

He spoke English very well in the documentary He came across as tactically inept and a horrible manager. He comes across the same in the book. Some of the stuff he said was comically absurd.

 

[Seattleallstar]

I just wish it was Lance free, but like what was said it's unavoidable at this point

 

[Warhawk]

He spoke English very well in the documentary He came across as tactically inept and a horrible manager. He comes across the same in the book. Some of the stuff he said was comically absurd.

Yeah, a lot of the tactics he discussed sounded interesting in theory, but you'd have to be a madman to actually try them.

 

[ggusta]

I just wish it was Lance free, but like what was said it's unavoidable at this point

Finally saw it last night alone (without family interruptions and running commentary obliterating what I am trying to watch, god bless the dvr) Koechli and I need to play high stakes poker together, soon. My goodness, some people should never try to deceive, it just isn't in them.

As far as Lance, times have changed and with regards to him, he comes up on the sh-t end on the stick every time there is any reference to him, and I like it. He spent a lifetime turning himself into an icon, and now he has become one, just not the one he was hoping for. Congratulations.

....and what about Phil Liggett .... talk about the last man standing! that is one long career.

Seemed like I had seen various parts of this coverage in a different documentary before a few years ago.

 

[slowspoke]

Saw this last night, very well put together and as gripping as the book. God the racing was good back in the 80's.

 

[Old&slow]

I thought the film did a decent job of displaying Lemond's parnaoia, obsessiveness and mental health issues without outwardly calling him a nut job. Although I thought the film was fair to Hinault but a bit too kind to Lemond. But it was well done.

 

[ghostofjoy]

Loved it, they did an excellent job of portraying the principal parties pov's on the events. Kochli, in all his sniveling tones and hesistant answers, comes off as a charicature of a second tier cartoon villain.

I'd never seen the Lemond/Hinault interview with Hinault saying 'he could crash.' That's just brutal alpha male material, the look of shock on Lemond's face was priceless.

 

[jens_attacks]

didn't see it yet but damn , that eurosport video.how greg descended the tourmalet . still has it

 

[SirLes]

I know it's not the accepted interpretation but having read the book I still think that Hinault did ensure Greg won the tour; just not in the way people were expecting.
Hinault may be many things but a stupid rider is not one of them. His attack when he was in the Yellow Jersey was utterly stupid and a rider of Hinault's experience would have known that. If he'd have really wanted to have won the Tour he would not have done that.

Hinault went to to that tour to have some fun. He knew that LeMond was the strongest rider and that he was the next best. (The field was not very strong that year imo). He was going to go down all guns blazing knowing that if he did that Lemond would almost certainly win and the rest would be destroyed. If Lemond didn't win, well then he wasn't a deserving champion.

I do agree that Hinault's pride was a motivating factor. No way was he going to be just a domestique.
Because of Hinault's approach we are still taking about that Tour. Both LeMond's and Hinault's reputations were enhanced.

Could he have worked for Lemond in a more traditional way? Of course and it would have been the biggest bore feast of a tour ever if he had. The French would have crucified Hinault and everyone would be saying Lemond only won because Hinault let him.

For me Hinault got it spot on and doesn't get enough credit.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[PosterBill]

Wow I had the same thoughts, Hinault attack in yellow would have been floyd landis like if it had it worked but I think he knew he had no chance of it...In some weird way I think 2nd place meant nothing to hinault and so he set out to rampage the race for basic fun. In noway am I comparing some of my rides to a pro but I ve entered races just to have fun and do absurd things...it was like being a kid again...anyway, hinault will never really explain his actions in any deep context bc I think he doesnt care all that much in a french kind of way

 

[Dedelou]

I know it's not the accepted interpretation but having read the book I still think that Hinault did ensure Greg won the tour; just not in the way people were expecting.
Hinault may be many things but a stupid rider is not one of them. His attack when he was in the Yellow Jersey was utterly stupid and a rider of Hinault's experience would have known that. If he'd have really wanted to have won the Tour he would not have done that.

Hinault went to to that tour to have some fun. He knew that LeMond was the strongest rider and that he was the next best. (The field was not very strong that year imo). He was going to go down all guns blazing knowing that if he did that Lemond would almost certainly win and the rest would be destroyed. If Lemond didn't win, well then he wasn't a deserving champion.

I do agree that Hinault's pride was a motivating factor. No way was he going to be just a domestique.
Because of Hinault's approach we are still taking about that Tour. Both LeMond's and Hinault's reputations were enhanced.

Could he have worked for Lemond in a more traditional way? Of course and it would have been the biggest bore feast of a tour ever if he had. The French would have crucified Hinault and everyone would be saying Lemond only won because Hinault let him.

For me Hinault got it spot on and doesn't get enough credit.

But that's just my opinion.

Thank you for articulating with style the very opinion I have supported for years. Having followed both 85 and 86 Tours up close and personal and followed Hinault's career, I always knew he would never just help LeMond win by being his domestic but by being his challenger. Bernard knew first end of Greg's talents on a bike and considered himself as the man LeMond had to beat to become his successor. I spoke to Bernard in 86 in Colorado Spring and to Alvarez, his life long supper fan: Both described very well how much Hinault believe in a new age of riding where North American cyclists would be at the top.

 

[Race Radio]

Not sure how long this will stay up but someone posted it on line

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elo5_iNEjRo&sns=tw