Andrew McQuaid accusses LeMond

[thirteen]

idiotic troll babble

this is getting really pathetic.

please, i beg you, forum regulars: do not engage the trolls.

their idiocy speaks volumes, no need to refute it.

at the very least, please do not quote them. honour those of us that use the Ignore feature... they impart no facts, just endless crap. it's tiresome.

 

[samerics]

Don't feed the trolls and they'll starve.....

 

[L'arriviste]

Judging by the functional illiteracy you must be Paul. You obviously do care otherwise you wouldn't respond denying being Andrew.

Since you are now applying 'beat convicted dopers' as evidence for doping, can I ask why you didn't apply this test to your boy Lance at any point between 2002 and 2012?

No, can't be, as (s)he's from Texas. I think Paul and Andrew are still in Ireland, right?

 

[skimazk]

i agree it's impossible to keep up with the likes of benotti69... spamming a massive 7.74 posts a day

 

[ultimobici]

I'm all for free speech, but for the love of God cant you just STFU and think before typing?

 

[DirtyWorks]

I edited for brevity, but so far you've provided no facts to check and hopelessly confused doping eras.

Now you are really off the tracks in this next one, hopelessly confusing oxygen vector doping and what came before it.

No way doping would be widespread if it is something you can live without in order to win and in many cases to survive the race, let's not forget that.

Yes, forget it because it's wrong.

What periods? Since he became professional, probably earlier, just like the rest of top cyclists.

Impressive lack of specifics. No dates, no times, no names. Please provide names, dates, drugs and any other specifics.

Which drugs? The vanguard drugs at the time.

Aaaand those were???? Impressive lack of specifics here, again. We need facts to test your argument. There are none here.

Did he take EPO? If the peloton or some teams were using EPO in 1989 and/or 1990 surely he did and there is a chance that he might have taken it in 1991, again, if other cyclists did. He was not that far from the winner, and getting on.

Hmm, still no specifics... And there's a chance you say??? Impressive display of nothing. AGAIN. And then there's the pesky problem of Lemond's last TdF where he was soundly beaten by EPO users. Except, you insist he "probably" did???

But hey, if Andrew McQuaid claims Lemond doped, like he did here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1065359&postcount=18
then it's GOT to be true because the McQuaid name in cycling is known for being truthful.

Maybe the UCI can open an "investigation" like they did for Landis' claims..

 

[86TDFWinner]

I'm all for free speech, but for the love of God cant you just STFU and think before typing?

LOL, that'd be a huge NO, he just can't help himself.

 

[86TDFWinner]

I edited for brevity, but so far you've provided no facts to check and hopelessly confused doping eras.

Now you are really off the tracks in this next one, hopelessly confusing oxygen vector doping and what came before it.



Yes, forget it because it's wrong.



Impressive lack of specifics. No dates, no times, no names. Please provide names, dates, drugs and any other specifics.


Aaaand those were???? Impressive lack of specifics here, again. We need facts to test your argument. There are none here.




Hmm, still no specifics... And there's a chance you say??? Impressive display of nothing. AGAIN. And then there's the pesky problem of Lemond's last TdF where he was soundly beaten by EPO users. Except, you insist he "probably" did???

But hey, if Andrew McQuaid claims Lemond doped, like he did here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showpost.php?p=1065359&postcount=18
then it's GOT to be true because the McQuaid name in cycling is known for being truthful.

Maybe the UCI can open an "investigation" like they did for Landis' claims..

LOL, again no surprise, he has NOTHING!. Albatros is simply talking out of both sides. I always enjoy engaging the "Lemond doped too" blockheads, the second you say" please post said proof evidence confirming such claims", they "suddenly" seem to disappear. Hopefully the next time Albatros rrturns, he'll bring said proof with him & post it here for all t read.

 

[runninboy]

Lemond was a more naturally gifted athete than Merckx. No question at all about that. While we will never know with certainty how many more Tours Lemond might have won absent the years lost to his hunting accident and the advent of the epo era after Lemond's final Tour win in 1990, I reckon that he would have won five, maybe six. But, again, we'll never know.

As for Lance the tri-guy. Apples and oranges. Different disciplines and skill sets. Also, back then tri did not have comparable competitor depth as compared to pro cycling at the same time.
[/B]

I agree. In addition the bulk of Lance's triathlon fame came in short sprint tri's when all the real players were in the olympic distance tri's.

 

[runninboy]

Ok just so i got this correct

Andrew McQuaid sent out an tweet with an unsubstantiated accusation that Greg Lemond was a doper. From a country with strict laws against libel.
Then a whole mess of trolls came out of the woodwork and threw a bunch of excrement and none of it stuck.

No links to any proof of Greg Lemond doping, no eye witness testimony , no positive doping tests, nothing at all. Total denial about Lemond's well documented early palmares, 3 world titles(one gold silver and bronze at junior worlds included) His exceptional Physical gifts, the highest VO2max recorded up to that time. Etc Etc Etc.
So basically it is because Greg was so good and accomplished so much is what is given as "proof" that he doped.
Ok i mentioned this in another thread but there are exceptionally gifted athletes
Greg Lemond was one
Jim Thorpe was one
Lance Armstrong was not
Jim Ryun was. As a high school sophmore He had a personal best mile time of 5:38 in the fall of 1962 As a junior in 1964 he became the first high schooler to break 4 minutes in the mile. That is an incredible improvement. In addition he represented the US at the Olympic Games in Tokyo that same year. He set a record that stood for 36 years and he did it without dope.

Such accomplishment would make Ryun a definite doper by today's standards but we know that amazing athletes do exist. Ryun was that and so was Lemond.

McQuaid better be ready to pay up because he has just libeled a great athlete...

 

[Sandthemall]

Something to consider...

Imagine how Lemond would have performed if he had taken epo...it would have been devastatingly inhuman (a rider of Lemond's caliber!). Instead, we have Lemond's performance getting noticeabley worse after his '89 victory: didn't win a single stage in '90. Barely hung on in '91. that is not the arc of an epo user. We know epo was just coming into the peloton in '89 and '90 because of the deaths...especially in 1990. Lemond would have trampled Fignon if he was on epo. The fact that Lemond was bewildered by his bad performances seems to indicate that everyone else was doping.

Btw, to those of you who doubt how rare a Lemond is, forget about his amazing one in a million vO2 max score...just watch him ride in 86 and 89...truly watch him. He's quite a spectacle to watch...a grace and fluidity that puts Coppi, Merckx and Hinault to shame. Roche and Fignon are quite beautiful to watch too...but fall a little short. I too believe that although Merckx is the greatest, Lemond was more physically gifted...and more unlucky.

I saw Lance ride the tour in '93. After he turned a few pedal strokes, I told a
friend 'he'll never win a tour'. Boy did I ever end up being right.

A Lemond is rarer than a Jordan or a Tiger...

 

[La Vie Claire]

He beat them all and those all were mostly doping, He worked with doping doctors. Pre EPO doping was tremendously important in a three week race as Lemond and many ex cyclists have indicated. If you could win without doping many other cyclists would have done so and we know that is not the case. No way doping would be widespread if it is something you can live without in order to win and in many cases to survive the race, let's not forget that.

What periods? Since he became professional, probably earlier, just like the rest of top cyclists.

Which drugs? The vanguard drugs at the time. Just read Armstrong USADA Case and they still appear there, in spite of their limited efficacy according to some of you.

Did he take EPO? If the peloton or some teams were using EPO in 1989 and/or 1990 surely he did and there is a chance that he might have taken it in 1991, again, if other cyclists did. He was not that far from the winner, and getting on.

Hey Friend,

Greg never tested postive.

Have a nice day!

 

[Albatros]

Hey Friend,

Greg never tested postive.

Have a nice day!

Nor did Indurain, Delgado or Hinault.

And what?

 

[FignonLeGrand]

I hope that CN picks this up and I also hope that Lemond sues McQuaid for libel.

Why would CN pick this up they are too busy writing and promoting crappy dopers like Rebellin going to more crappy teams who support crappy dopers

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

Why would CN pick this up they are too busy writing and promoting crappy dopers like Rebellin going to more crappy teams who support crappy dopers

My mistake. I mistakenly thought Benson was serious when he promised that CN would be asking tough questions.

Silly me, one piece and its back to how we were.

 

[D-Queued]

...

I saw Lance ride the tour in '93. After he turned a few pedal strokes, I told a
friend 'he'll never win a tour'. Boy did I ever end up being right.

...

Best first post ever?

And, boy, is that funny!

Nor did Indurain, Delgado or Hinault.

And what?

One word: Probenecid. And Indurain has more or less admitted (even though I will deny this until I die).

Dave.

 

[hiero2]

I hope that CN picks this up and I also hope that Lemond sues McQuaid for libel.

I would like that.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Imagine how Lemond would have performed if he had taken epo...it would have been devastatingly inhuman (a rider of Lemond's caliber!). Instead...

Great first post. Welcome to the forum.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Albatros is providing an excellent example of the final fallback position of the terminal fanboy "oh yeah, well LeMond doped too because, because..........well because I say so".

 

[Albatros]

Best first post ever?

And, boy, is that funny!



One word: Probenecid. And Indurain has more or less admitted (even though I will deny this until I die).

Dave.

I am very sorry but Probenecid was not on the UCI list. And yes, Indurain has more or less admitted it, which it makes me doubt if he ever did, cause Lemond who did is in denial.

Actually I think Lemond ultimate goal is to eventually confess he did dope. The man doesn't know how to get attention. And the funny thing is they are ignoring him.

 

[Eyeballs Out]

I would hope that Greg doesn't take legal action over this. Maintain the higher ground and focus on what is important (i.e. the things he wrote about in his open letter). Being slandered / libelled is not nice but getting the lawyers involved is a move straight out of the Armstrong / McQuaid handbook and would just be an unnecessary distraction.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Ok just so i got this correct

Andrew McQuaid sent out an tweet with an unsubstantiated accusation that Greg Lemond was a doper. From a country with strict laws against libel.
Then a whole mess of trolls came out of the woodwork and threw a bunch of excrement and none of it stuck.

No links to any proof of Greg Lemond doping, no eye witness testimony , no positive doping tests, nothing at all. Total denial about Lemond's well documented early palmares, 3 world titles(one gold silver and bronze at junior worlds included) His exceptional Physical gifts, the highest VO2max recorded up to that time. Etc Etc Etc.
So basically it is because Greg was so good and accomplished so much is what is given as "proof" that he doped.
Ok i mentioned this in another thread but there are exceptionally gifted athletes
Greg Lemond was one
Jim Thorpe was one
Lance Armstrong was not
Jim Ryun was. As a high school sophmore He had a personal best mile time of 5:38 in the fall of 1962 As a junior in 1964 he became the first high schooler to break 4 minutes in the mile. That is an incredible improvement. In addition he represented the US at the Olympic Games in Tokyo that same year. He set a record that stood for 36 years and he did it without dope.

Such accomplishment would make Ryun a definite doper by today's standards but we know that amazing athletes do exist. Ryun was that and so was Lemond.

McQuaid better be ready to pay up because he has just libeled a great athlete...

It appears Lemond isn't quite as litigious as Wonderboy and Pat and Hein though. At the moment, it proves again what a class act Lemond is. I wouldn't blame him if the sued a McQuaid this time... That becomes an expensive hobby.

 

[Albatros]

Imagine how Lemond would have performed if he had taken epo...it would have been devastatingly inhuman (a rider of Lemond's caliber!). Instead, we have Lemond's performance getting noticeabley worse after his '89 victory: didn't win a single stage in '90. Barely hung on in '91. that is not the arc of an epo user. We know epo was just coming into the peloton in '89 and '90 because of the deaths...especially in 1990. Lemond would have trampled Fignon if he was on epo. The fact that Lemond was bewildered by his bad performances seems to indicate that everyone else was doping.

Btw, to those of you who doubt how rare a Lemond is, forget about his amazing one in a million vO2 max score...just watch him ride in 86 and 89...truly watch him. He's quite a spectacle to watch...a grace and fluidity that puts Coppi, Merckx and Hinault to shame. Roche and Fignon are quite beautiful to watch too...but fall a little short. I too believe that although Merckx is the greatest, Lemond was more physically gifted...and more unlucky.

I saw Lance ride the tour in '93. After he turned a few pedal strokes, I told a
friend 'he'll never win a tour'. Boy did I ever end up being right.

A Lemond is rarer than a Jordan or a Tiger...

Maybe from being sacked by PDM and middle of the pack in the Giro the italia to win the Tour short after. EPO does that to you.

Anyway, let's imagine that EPO use starts to take place in 1991, when our hero loses against the big cheats (the small cheats he had managed to beat thorughout his career on bread and water).

EPO does provide a 10% to 15% improvement right?

Lemond wins in 1990 ( Echevarri picking Delgado over Indurain as leader of the team )
Lemond speed 38.621 km/h
Chiapucchi, a definite EPO doper according to all comes second only 2 min 16 sec to Greg.

Shall we say the little Italian was already experimenting with it? What about Delgado, only 5 minutes behind Lemond and more than half of that time because of his blunder at the prologue.
After all, Delgado improvement on TT was as spectacular and suspicious.

Could it be possible that Lemond managed to beat the EPO dopers in 1990? Maybe his rivals were only blood doping. Othewise our Greg would have made mincemeat of Chiapucci on steroids and cortisone alone. Think about it, we are denigrating Lemond.

And it doesns't take a great deal of imagination that "en route" cyclists were doing what the Olympic US track team did, whose coach used to be Greg's coach by the way (mentioning this for reference purposes).

FFS even Milan, a football team, sorry, soccer, were rumoured to do blood doping, not to mention that Beckenbauer a German player of the 70' has confessed to it. And in th case of the German we are talking about the 70's.Since when footballers have been more advanced that cyclists taking doping? (except probably now )

I mean, the more substances we make Lemond rivals take, the greater his legacy.

I propose from now on that Lemond last tour was won against EPO dopers and the toll it took on him caused those misterious illnesses that were to be his dismissal in 1991 and later years.

 

[spetsa]

Maybe from being sacked by PDM and middle of the pack in the Giro the italia to win the Tour short after. EPO does that to you.

Anyway, let's imagine that EPO use starts to take place in 1991, when our hero loses against the big cheats (the small cheats he had managed to beat thorughout his career on bread and water).

EPO does provide a 10% to 15% improvement right?

Lemond wins in 1990 ( Echevarri picking Delgado over Indurain as leader of the team )
Lemond speed 38.621 km/h
Chiapucchi, a definite EPO doper according to all comes second only 2 min 16 sec to Greg.

Shall we say the little Italian was already experimenting with it? What about Delgado, only 5 minutes behind Lemond and more than half of that time because of his blunder at the prologue.
After all, Delgado improvement on TT was as spectacular and suspicious.

Could it be possible that Lemond managed to beat the EPO dopers in 1990? Maybe his rivals were only blood doping. Othewise our Greg would have made mincemeat of Chiapucci on steroids and cortisone alone. Think about it, we are denigrating Lemond.

And it doesns't take a great deal of imagination that "en route" cyclists were doing what the Olympic US track team did, whose coach used to be Greg's coach by the way (mentioning this for reference purposes).

FFS even Milan, a football team, sorry, soccer, were rumoured to do blood doping, not to mention that Beckenbauer a German player of the 70' has confessed to it. And in th case of the German we are talking about the 70's.Since when footballers have been more advanced that cyclists taking doping? (except probably now )

I mean, the more substances we make Lemond rivals take, the greater his legacy.

I propose from now on that Lemond last tour was won against EPO dopers and the toll it took on him caused those misterious illnesses that were to be his dismissal in 1991 and later years.

Maybe you should start a new thread titled "Imagine what would have been, if what we imagine would have been true."

 

[manafana]

McQuaid (any of them) should shut up and take it up the back door, bunch of power abusers who just want be like fifa.