Andrew McQuaid accusses LeMond

[mac220]

out of ten...

evidence for greg doping = 0 (although lets call beating dopers a 1)
evidence for McQuaid being corrupt = 9 (although lets call the acceptance of a blatant financial donation from a rider who has posted a positive and suspicious tests a 10)

going further
evidence of greg being one of the most naturally talented athletes of all time = 9
evidence of McQuaid being one of the worst sports administrators of all time = 9

I've been lurking on this and other forums for sometime listening to what is being said about the different riders and I decided that it was time to make my first post. This may have been mentioned and if it has, sorry to repeat.

I would like to support the defence of Lemond, I've read through that vast majority of this thread and one point which needs to be considered is the situation where Lemond was threatened with blackmail relating to his childhood. There is no doubt that the threat of this kind of information being made public would have been incredibly difficult for Lemond. However instead of collapsing and letting someone pressure him he held a press conference and spoke about his childhood so that he was not in a position to be blackmailed.

This situation speaks volumes for me about Greg Lemond's character and integrity. If this is taken into account with respect to the argument in this thread versus the someone who would be happy to go to Africa and race during the apatite era it provides a backdrop and maybe some light on the underlying character of the people involved.

Lemond big plus
Others......not so much

Cheers,

Mac

 

[goober]

Pre EPO era. LeMond was a freak on a bike.

That is why the micro dopers try to dope to LeMonds level and claim they are clean. Not many ever got to LeMonds level naturally, ever.

I would love to see LeMond asked the following question "Greg, did you ever take any substances on the banned substance list while competing in cycling?". I would like to be there when they ask this question because if he answers No I would have some very interesting follow-up questions for Mr Lemond to help possibly refresh his memory...

 

[arjanh]

I would love to see LeMond asked the following question "Greg, did you ever take any substances on the banned substance list while competing in cycling?". I would like to be there when they ask this question because if he answers No I would have some very interesting follow-up questions for Mr Lemond to help possibly refresh his memory...

Care to share these questions here?

 

[guilder]

Lemond and Omerta are like two elephants in the room.

 

[red_flanders]

Care to share these questions here?

That would be interesting for sure.

 

[131313]

That would be interesting for sure.

I can already tell you the follow-up question: "did you use coke recreationally while competing in cycling". A 7-11 mechanic whose name I forget made this allegation pretty frequently, enough that I heard it second hand from at least 3 different people. I never heard it directly from the guy. He never alleged he was doping while racing, just that he was partying with it. I'm guessing that's the question to which goober is alluding. LeMond isn't that hard to track down. Find him and ask him yourself if you really want to know.

As far as LeMond and performance-enhancing drugs, it seems really simple to me: if he had used them, Armstrong would have uncovered dirt on him long ago. That fact that he hasn't is probably the best "proof" out there, because we know it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying!

 

[ultimobici]

Nor did Indurain, Delgado or Hinault.

And what?

Wrong.

Both Delgado and indurain tested positive, only to get off on technicalities.

Delgado's was 1988 for probenecid
http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Delgado-jurisdiction/

Indurain's was 1994 for salbutamol which was banned in France.
http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Indurain-positive/

As for Hinault, while he never was popped, his not defence of his 82 Tour title was put down by many to overuse of cortisone in the 83 Vuelta.

 

[goober]

I can already tell you the follow-up question: "did you use coke recreationally while competing in cycling". A 7-11 mechanic whose name I forget made this allegation pretty frequently, enough that I heard it second hand from at least 3 different people. I never heard it directly from the guy. He never alleged he was doping while racing, just that he was partying with it. I'm guessing that's the question to which goober is alluding. LeMond isn't that hard to track down. Find him and ask him yourself if you really want to know.

As far as LeMond and performance-enhancing drugs, it seems really simple to me: if he had used them, Armstrong would have uncovered dirt on him long ago. That fact that he hasn't is probably the best "proof" out there, because we know it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying!

Yes and no. More than Coke and plenty of others saw use of banned substances while 'not on the bike competing' lol - I am sure Lance was not on the bike either while using banned substances. Prohibited substance not only by cycling but by LAW.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

It feels like a suspension is a brewing.

interesting is code for probably does not know what the hell they are talking about and is just making **** up.

Now where is that 7-11 poster I have around here.........I know there is some people in the background I could say saw Greg on the testosterone......

 

[guilder]

...As far as LeMond and performance-enhancing drugs, it seems really simple to me: if he had used them, Armstrong would have uncovered dirt on him long ago. That fact that he hasn't is probably the best "proof" out there, because we know it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying!

Everyone has a price and since Lance could afford it he therefore hadn't tried to uncover anything about Lemond. The fact that no one came forward is the best "proof" out there. Maybe someone with a conscience will out the whole lot of those "blood dopers" of the eighties.

 

[131313]

Yes and no. More than Coke and plenty of others saw use of banned substances while 'not on the bike competing' lol - I am sure Lance was not on the bike either while using banned substances.

You can try to muddle the distinction if you like, but there's a difference between recreational drug use performance-enhancing drugs. That's why some drugs (such as cocaine) aren't banned out of competition. If you want to compare recreational coke use to EPO, blood doping, test, et. al. because it fits your narrative, that's fine, but just try to understand your own motivation for doing so--which is to rationalize Armstrong's cheating and smear LeMond. Acceptance is the first step.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Yes and no. More than Coke and plenty of others saw use of banned substances while 'not on the bike competing' lol - I am sure Lance was not on the bike either while using banned substances. Prohibited substance not only by cycling but by LAW.

"More than coke" - like what?
If you are on about recreational drugs - that's hardly a secret.
If its PEDs, then that would be different.

 

[Jeremiah]

I can already tell you the follow-up question: "did you use coke recreationally while competing in cycling". A 7-11 mechanic whose name I forget made this allegation pretty frequently, enough that I heard it second hand from at least 3 different people. I never heard it directly from the guy. He never alleged he was doping while racing, just that he was partying with it. I'm guessing that's the question to which goober is alluding. LeMond isn't that hard to track down. Find him and ask him yourself if you really want to know.

As far as LeMond and performance-enhancing drugs, it seems really simple to me: if he had used them, Armstrong would have uncovered dirt on him long ago. That fact that he hasn't is probably the best "proof" out there, because we know it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying!

And if that's true, which I'm not saying it is, seeing that LeMond is severely ADHD, any stimulant would have probably served to calm him down.

I've been told by a friend who suffers from ADHD that Cocaine almost puts him to sleep.. All of the hyperactive "stimming" is not necessary with uppers. This crazy friend asked me for oxycodones, I thought he had pain, and I had half a bottle left from some wisdom teeth extraction. The guy took 7 at once and was hyped up out of his mind. I can't remember the size but they weren't small ones. It's a pretty well known effect of uppers and downers on ADHD sufferers.

At any rate if LeMond was doing this he was self medicating... Anyway, I don't buy the story just on the basis of how it's being introduced here, as a way to slime LeMond.

 

[131313]

Anyway, I don't buy the story just on the basis of how it's being introduced here, as a way to slime LeMond.

I'm willing to buy it, though personally I don't have a strong opinion nor do I really care much either way. I'm not being obtuse, it's just that I've heard it 2nd and 3rd hand, I don't personally know the guy who made the claim. To me there's a clear distinction between performance-enhancing drugs and recreational drugs. I don't partake in either, BTW, I'm just agnostic on recreational drug use. Still, it is of course a complete obfuscation, done for the reasons I listed before. The last refrain from the faithful: "but LeMond..".

 

[Albatros]

Wrong.

Both Delgado and indurain tested positive, only to get off on technicalities.

Delgado's was 1988 for probenecid
http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Delgado-jurisdiction/

Indurain's was 1994 for salbutamol which was banned in France.
http://www.dopeology.org/incidents/Indurain-positive/

As for Hinault, while he never was popped, his not defence of his 82 Tour title was put down by many to overuse of cortisone in the 83 Vuelta.

Delgado won the Tour of 1988 and Indurain in 1994. Hinault's is speculation.

None tested positive according to UCI rules, nobody has come to the fore accusing them of doping. Aren't those the rules for considering a rider clean?

By the way, if you think they were dopers, can you think of another Tour de France winner being clean other than Lemond?

If the answer is not, how would you explain such anomaly?

 

[D-Queued]

Delgado won the Tour of 1988 and Indurain in 1994. Hinault's is speculation.

None tested positive according to UCI rules, nobody has come to the fore accusing them of doping. Aren't those the rules for considering a rider clean?

By the way, if you think they were dopers, can you think of another Tour de France winner being clean other than Lemond?

If the answer is not, how would you explain such anomaly?

Umm, since you have a short memory span, let's just go with Bradley Wiggins.

What is your point?

There is no evidence. There are no witnesses. There is no testimony.

There is nothing.

Nothing but repeated attempts to slime LeMond all motivated by a desire to somehow raise up Lance by putting others down.

The only reason I can see that this is being tolerated is that Lance's supporters were provided extreme latitude prior to the confirmation of his guilt, and the moderators have not yet re-balanced the playing field.

Dave.

 

[86TDFWinner]

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".

LOL, exactly! He's provided no proof whatsoever, his word means about as much as Wonderboys(and even less so because he hasn't posted anything credible from anyone)

 

[VeloCity]

nobody has come to the fore accusing them of doping.

Thomas Davy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,3604,388708,00.html

 

[86TDFWinner]

I would love to see LeMond asked the following question "Greg, did you ever take any substances on the banned substance list while competing in cycling?". I would like to be there when they ask this question because if he answers No I would have some very interesting follow-up questions for Mr Lemond to help possibly refresh his memory...

Care to share your proof claiming otherwise?

 

[86TDFWinner]

As far as LeMond and performance-enhancing drugs, it seems really simple to me: if he had used them, Armstrong would have uncovered dirt on him long ago. That fact that he hasn't is probably the best "proof" out there, because we know it certainly wasn't for a lack of trying!

Facts his dopey(and delusional) fanboys can't seem to comprehend, or grasp. They have to find something on Greg, to try to deflect some of the heat off their cheater.

 

[Rui Quinta]

Lemond doped? It's impossible. Doping was created in 1998 by Lance Armstrong... oh, wait, Eddy Merckx and Zoetemelk in the 70s, Coppi in the 50s...

 

[veganrob]

Lemond doped? It's impossible. Doping was created in 1998 by Lance Armstrong... oh, wait, Eddy Merckx and Zoetemelk in the 70s, Coppi in the 50s...

Your point being...

 

[Hugh Januss]

Lemond doped? It's impossible. Doping was created in 1998 by Lance Armstrong... oh, wait, Eddy Merckx and Zoetemelk in the 70s, Coppi in the 50s...

Good one! Oh wait, not really. Unless you have been under a rock or you are kind of slow you have probably read some stuff on here about the differences in doping efficiency between the 70's to late 80's and the early 90's to present day. If you're really slow then the cliff notes version is that EPO/transfusions/cocktail of designer steroids/professional doping doctors totally changed the doping landscape.
Whether or not the average pro popped a bennie or three in the seventies it was still very possible to win clean then if you really wanted, or if you did not come from the Euro-centric cycling mainstream.
Doping was not created by LA it was only perfected by him, at which point it became an American specialty.

 

[Sarcastic Wet Trout]

Thomas Davy.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/story/0,3604,388708,00.html

Favorite line:

Next year's Tour (2001), which starts in the Channel ports, will be one of the shortest ever at 2,160 miles, with the longest stage a mere 140 miles, and two rest days. In the Indurain years the Tour approached 2,500 miles, with one rest day. The intention is to produce more exciting racing, with less reason for riders to use drugs.

 

[D-Queued]

Lemond doped? It's impossible. Doping was created in 1998 by Lance Armstrong... oh, wait, Eddy Merckx and Zoetemelk in the 70s, Coppi in the 50s...

Spanning pre-historic and even historic times, the human race has developed, hidden, lost, recovered, and re-developed knowledge over and over again.

As former HP CEO Lewis Platt once observed, if HP knew what HP knows, it would be four times its size.

Why would doping in the peloton be any different?

Let's lessen the challenge you have to prove that LeMond doped. Rather, please enlighten us by identifying what knowledge-bearing doping expert was LeMond working with? Where is LeMond's Ferrari? Where are the payments? Where are the trash cans full of Actovegin?

Ultimately, the LeMond era ended with the introduction of EPO. With EPO, cycling had invented fire and the sport was forever changed. LeMond, however, was raw meat and efforts to cannibalize his legacy continue.

Dave.