Greg Lemond from another great racer's point of view

[gobuck]

http://stevetilford.com/


I’m sick of this “I train harder” thing

 

[attila]

Special

I agree. I'm nothing special. No matter how hard I train, there are riders out there who I will never catch and can drop me at will.

I remember seeing a handful of athletes that were clearly better than anyone else on the field. When they do their thing, whether it's riding, running, playing football etc., they were simply superior. Training honed those skills. Or lack of training forced early retirement.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Kennf1]

Interesting article. I like that photo from the Coors Classic-- looks like the old Morgul Bismarck course.

 

[amp300]

Good read, thanks for the link.

 

[issoisso]

"That's not to say I didn't work hard. Lots of riders work hard. It's the talented ones that float to the top. I was just lucky enough to win the genetic lottery"
- Greg LeMond

 

[MarkvW]

not only that

I agree. I'm nothing special. No matter how hard I train, there are riders out there who I will never catch and can drop me at will.

I remember seeing a handful of athletes that were clearly better than anyone else on the field. When they do their thing, whether it's riding, running, playing football etc., they were simply superior. Training honed those skills. Or lack of training forced early retirement.

Couldn't agree more.

Not only that, but the best use of dope is in training. The dope helps the recovery immensely, so of course the doped racer can train harder.

But your point is very well taken. Once you refute the "I train harder" argument, as Mr. Tilford points out, the only lie the doper has left is the "I'm genetically superior" argument--and genetic freaks like Lemond are rare. In the pro peloton of today, there are way more Lemonds than there ought to be.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

...the only lie the doper has left is the "I'm genetically superior" argument--and genetic freaks like Lemond are rare.

Like a "larger than average heart," "higher than average VO2 Max," "higher than average ability to process lactic acid" and some of the other Coyle BS?

 

[D-Queued]

Not only that, but the best use of dope is in training. The dope helps the recovery immensely, so of course the doped racer can train harder.

But your point is very well taken. Once you refute the "I train harder" argument, as Mr. Tilford points out, the only lie the doper has left is the "I'm genetically superior" argument--and genetic freaks like Lemond are rare. In the pro peloton of today, there are way more Lemonds than there ought to be.

Perhaps some influence of '70s pop culture can explain the trend:

“We can rebuild him. We have the technology. We can make him better than he was. Better...stronger...faster.”

How much were those bank transfers again?

Dave.

 

[Benotti69]

Perhaps some influence of '70s pop culture can explain the trend:

“We can rebuild him. We have the technology. We can make him better than he was. Better...stronger...faster.”

How much were those bank transfers again?

Dave.

the 20MillionDollar Wonderboy

 

[patrick767]

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old. The following year he obliterated the entire TdF field, winning with 5 stage victories and over 10 minutes over second place Hinault, who got himself his fifth TdF win the next year.

After two injury plagued years, '85 and '86, Fignon never seemed to quite reach the level he'd been at before, except when he lost to Lemond by just 8 seconds.

Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

 

[IzzyStradlin]

Once you refute the "I train harder" argument, as Mr. Tilford points out, the only lie the doper has left is the "I'm genetically superior" argument--and genetic freaks like Lemond are rare. In the pro peloton of today, there are way more Lemonds than there ought to be.

And you can see the real freaks from a long ways away. There won't be too many that are mediocre for the beginning of their career, then miraculously dial in their training and rise to the top.

 

[Granville57]

And you can see the real freaks from a long ways away. There won't be too many that are mediocre for the beginning of their career, then miraculously dial in their training and rise to the top.

I agree with your premise, that late blooming athletes are often suspicious and often turn out to be doping. But now we're faced with a different problem: athletes are starting to dope at a younger and younger age in many sports—the recent report of 13 to 14 year-old Italian junior riders being a perfect example.

So the lines are blurred even further now.

 

[Digger]

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old. The following year he obliterated the entire TdF field, winning with 5 stage victories and over 10 minutes over second place Hinault, who got himself his fifth TdF win the next year.

After two injury plagued years, '85 and '86, Fignon never seemed to quite reach the level he'd been at before, except when he lost to Lemond by just 8 seconds.

Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

Greg by his own admittance was never the same rider himself after his hunting accdient.

 

[Escarabajo]

I agree with your premise, that late blooming athletes are often suspicious and often turn out to be doping. But now we're faced with a different problem: athletes are starting to dope at a younger and younger age in many sports—the recent report of 13 to 14 year-old Italian junior riders being a perfect example.

So the lines are blurred even further now.

+1.

Correct, this is what makes it worse. This criteria is not even good anymore.

The author don't believe in the Fleche Wallonne winner either (at least that's what I understood)

I just think that Fignon and Hinault were just as talented as Greg. IMHO.

Nice read. Thanks gobuck.

 

[Topangarider]

Article:
Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. ..

actually Greg beat Hinault for his first tour win

 

[ultimobici]

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old. The following year he obliterated the entire TdF field, winning with 5 stage victories and over 10 minutes over second place Hinault, who got himself his fifth TdF win the next year.

After two injury plagued years, '85 and '86, Fignon never seemed to quite reach the level he'd been at before, except when he lost to Lemond by just 8 seconds.

Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

Lemond actually gave his first win away in 85 on team orders.

But his 89 win over Fignon was brilliant due to several factors
1 He had virtually no team-mates after the first week
2 Fignon had one of the strongest teams in the sport
3 He had not long recovered from his hunting accident
4 He wasn't being paid by the 89 Tour

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old. The following year he obliterated the entire TdF field, winning with 5 stage victories and over 10 minutes over second place Hinault, who got himself his fifth TdF win the next year.

After two injury plagued years, '85 and '86, Fignon never seemed to quite reach the level he'd been at before, except when he lost to Lemond by just 8 seconds.

Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

Lemond won two tours after he got shot. Shot. I mean, wtf. Bullets can't keep this mofo down. Fignon was good, but Lemond was on a different level. It's a shame we have worthless chammy sniffers (I'm not referring to you at all) who try to tarnish his legacy just so they can get another dingleberry from Ferrari's protege.

Seriously, Lemond was freaking shot. Can you imagine the conversation with his rivals?

Hey, why'd you miss last year's Tour?
I got shot.
Oh.

 

[JA.Tri]

bit of an aside

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old. The following year he obliterated the entire TdF field, winning with 5 stage victories and over 10 minutes over second place Hinault, who got himself his fifth TdF win the next year.

After two injury plagued years, '85 and '86, Fignon never seemed to quite reach the level he'd been at before, except when he lost to Lemond by just 8 seconds.

Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

Agreed. No doubt Lemond fantastic. To my mind a significant amount of time that Lemond made up in the TT (to win) was due to his ability. However also no doubt that the aero (triathlon) bars and helmet were crucial.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

Agreed. No doubt Lemond fantastic. To my mind a significant amount of time that Lemond made up in the TT (to win) was due to his ability. However also no doubt that the aero (triathlon) bars and helmet were crucial.

There's a mental side to cycling as well. The greats don't just turn the pedals, they turn the wheels upstairs.

 

[JA.Tri]

There's a mental side to cycling as well. The greats don't just turn the pedals, they turn the wheels upstairs.

Agreed. A "great" really is a freak: genetics, training, strategy, will power...

A stack of factors need to be in the cyclist's favour to reach the pinnacle.

 

[sartain]

Lemond won two tours after he got shot. Shot. I mean, wtf. Bullets can't keep this mofo down. Fignon was good, but Lemond was on a different level. It's a shame we have worthless chammy sniffers (I'm not referring to you at all) who try to tarnish his legacy just so they can get another dingleberry from Ferrari's protege.

Seriously, Lemond was freaking shot. Can you imagine the conversation with his rivals?

Hey, why'd you miss last year's Tour?
I got shot.
Oh.

My point exactly, which I have raised a few times on different threads in The Clinic. Coming back from such an event, keep in mind this was a close range shot gun blast, only to race at the highest level again in the TDF is IMO orders of magnitude a greater accomplishment than LA's triumph over cancer.

Alas, the "great unwashed" can't understand this because let's face it, how many people know someone that has take a direct blast at close range from a shot gun . . . not many. But everyone knows someone how has been touched by cancer. LA's inner circle was smart enough to understand this, seized the moment, and capitalized on it. It really was pretty brilliant on their part; I don't think that even they realized how far this gravy train would take them when they started.

 

[rhubroma]

Lemond rode during the 70's (amateur) and 80's (pro). He thus road before the hyper-tech, hyper-PROGRAMS, hyper-corporate age, and robotic- professionalism, got shot during his best years, gave away his first Tour as an American on a French team (just the cultural barriers alone, as the first US champ in Europe were considerable in the beginning on a French team) and still won 3 Tours and two Worlds.

As an American, back then, he also never found it easy being slim throughout the year as say the Italians or French or Belgian riders would do rather naturally, or at least not put on as much weight in the winter as Greg did. I think only Ullrich was a "talented" as he in this.

In any case, had he been French, and not gotten shot, how many Tours would he have won? 5? 6? 7? Because the possibility of a streak from 85-90-91, was there. It think he would have won several classics as well. He had the potential, perhaps, to win just about all of them, if not all from Flanders, to Roubaix, to Liege to Lombardy. Not many riders can claim that and be able to win the grand tours as well. He had exceptional all around abilities.

I know you can't re-write history, but Lemond didn't achieve the palmares that his undoubted class deserved, due to a number of circumstance I have tried to outline.

 

[red_flanders]

Article:
I raced with Fignon, Hinault, Van der Poel, Pascal Richard, and a ton of other “champions”. Lance Armstrong also. Greg made these guys look like amateurs when he set his mind to it.

Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win.

That was his second. He won his first in '86. He placed third in '84, in his Tour debut working for Fignon at the age of 23. He placed second in '85 working for Hinault. Shot, he was out of the '87-'88 Tours, and won in '89 and '90.

 

[La Vie Claire]

Article:
Umm... Lemond beat Fignon by 8 seconds for his 1st Tour win. That's not making Fignon look like an amateur. Fignon won a pair of TdFs including one at just 22 years old.
...
Credit Lemond with being a fantastic rider, but let's not take anything away from the nearly as good Fignon.

Lemond was coming back from getting shot 2 years before. No one thought he even had a chance. Lemond without the shotgun pellets would have destroyed Fignon in 87, 88 and 89. Had it not been for the accident and the advent of EPO, Lemond would have been one of the best ever. Instead we have a bottle carrier like Claudio 'Cappuccino' Chiappucci contending for the Tour.

 

[La Vie Claire]

Tilford continues in the comments area:

I grew up racing with Greg. He was so much better than all of us when he was 15, it was a joke. He could beat Wayne Stetina and George Mount the first year he raced. George was 6th in the Olympics. And, as you know, we had a pretty crazy good crop of juniors at the time. Davis, Jeff Bradley, Greg Demgen, Alexi, Ron Kiefel, Thurlow, etc. If we all ganged up against Greg, he would still destroy us. Greg LeMond was not taking drugs back then. No way.