Lemond and the current inquiry

[Bicicleta]

I agree. We should exempt him for prosecution for any crime, and exempt him from paying income tax, too.

Lance should get himself appointed ambassador to somewhere then anytime he is accused of something he can claim diplomatic inminuty. Ambassador of Afghanistan - yeah - that would do it.

 

[theswordsman]

I'm amazed that people think that trying to influence the court of public opinion might affect the outcome of the growing International investigation.

For those now trying to discredit LeMond, especially the ones saying he would have no knowledge - read the articles a bit closer. The original subpoena was for all of the documents Greg had pertaining to the lawsuit with Trek, which had to do with the way they treated his bike line after he spoke out against Armstrong. That paperwork would have been the result of a lot of research and interviews, plus documentation of agreements and communication. I think it's natural that the Grand Jury might have a few questions regarding those proceedings.

I think that Greg's comparison to the Mafia will prove to be pretty accurate once this all comes to light. There are a lot of people trying to intimidate and bully in Lance's name. I've never met the guy, but I've had threats just for sharing links on twitter. Some tool even said the "curse of juan pelota" was upon me. The New York Times spoke to riders from other teams who heard Armstrong badmouthing Contador at the 2009 team table, while Alberto was sat there.

Those riders wanted to remain anonymous, saying they feared repercussions from Armstrong and the team, for telling the truth about something they observed. If they're afraid to be quoted by name over something so simple, and legal, imagine how much intimidation they've experienced in the past decade. And imagine how freeing it would be to testify under oath, in private, about someone who brought fear to professional athletes at the top of their sport?

People keep talking about Landis. His revelations have already helped cycling, because Ashenden, Catlin and others gained knowledge about current doping practices, and the police, especially the French ones, learned how things get delivered to riders. Hopefully that deterred potential cheaters at the Tour, and the anti-doping doctors have a better idea of what to look for.

Riders are going to talk, under oath. The more investigators know, the more connections can be made, and they will find documents, and they will exert pressure on people who have committed crimes. And publications that don't rely on cycling related income, like WSJ, ESPN, Sports Illustrated, the New York Times, and more and more, can do more with one article stating corroborated facts than a whole army of you can do in all the cycling forums in the world. Yes, you can show up in packs, or with puppets, and make it seem like there's agreement, but in real life, you're not changing a single opinion to your point of view.

Do you actually think Lance gained more fans than he lost during the three weeks of the Tour?

 

[theswordsman]

Oh! the grand jury also might want information about the alleged $300,000 bribe LeMond said Armstrong offered someone in cycling to claim that Greg used EPO. I'm sure a lot of the new names here will feel that trifle isn't worth discussing, but since you're all about the truth, wouldn't you like LeMond to be asked about it under oath? Oh wait, that would lead to the third person being subpoenaed, and they'd be asked for the truth, and evidence, so if there was a text, or if a phone conversation took place, and phone bills could prove that, and...

Please remember, just because Armstrong is the one who can generate media support, doesn't mean this investigation isn't just as much about tracking down guys who traffic in illegal substances across International borders, and a lot of other people whose activities should be exposed.

 

[danjo007]

Yes, you can show up in packs, or with puppets, and make it seem like there's agreement, but in real life, you're not changing a single opinion to your point of view.

please heed your own advice

 

[Ferminal]

I'm not sure why Cycling News is providing a venue for Greg Lemond to publish his often times factually flawed commentary or why he is considered to be above suspicion when it comes to doping. The expression "thou doth protest too much" comes to mind. Isn't he the one who holds the record for the highest average speed in an individual time trial? Am I to believe that as a clean athlete he has outperformed all the cyclists who have doped over the years? Every time I hear what he has to say I find his voice to be that of a whiner who's obvious intention is to discredit the athlete who far eclipsed his cycling accomplishments. Lemond was a whiner when he rode and continues to be one till this day.

I find it unbelievable that the feds think that to investigate Lance Armstrong is a good use of our tax dollars. The man does more good for humanity in a day then Lemond has done in his lifetime.

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=9126

You would think people making their first post would do their best to comply by not duplicating a thread or posting in the wrong forum.

 

[red_flanders]

No reason to debate if Lemond was clean or not, just don't get what his point is. Does he think he's making a better cycling by trying to prove something that happened 10 years ago? He either has something to gain or a huge beef.

Something to gain: A cleaned up sport that he loved and still does love.

A huge beef: Sticking to the guy who has repeatedly attacked and tried to intimidate him, going so far as to threaten his livelihood and his good name.

Makes sense to me. What's the mystery for you?

Sounds like you came here from another forum just to slag Lemond. I'll call it what it is. One more example of the last squirming death throes of the Cognitive Dissonnanti.

You have nothing in cycling to talk about other than to spin the facts and attack Lemond for shining a light where you don't want to look? Sad. Truly I hope there are fewer and fewer who will not accept the facts.

Post about a race. Become a fan of the sport, not one individual. Tell yourself..."I was wrong, wrong for years". Watch some races from the eighties and enjoy Lemond for what he was--they guy that allowed the other Americans to exist in the sport. You'll feel better.

 

[outrage9]

Can any of you actually discuss anything without trying to slam and label everyone else on the forum?

Why wouldn't things change between Trek, Lemond, and Armstrong if Greg steps in saying Lance is a doper with no proof? He attacked their star at the height and had nothing to show for it because they didn't support a secondary line that nobody wanted for 20 years but he settled it for a charity donation? If you owned a company that was winning the TdF every year regardless of who was on the bike, and Greg started trashing the guy riding it without proof, what would you do?

All I'm saying is that I think he could do more to promote cycling, to get people interested in it, not turn them off by screaming "DOPER" every time someone gives him a microphone. Average Joe American doesn't even know what all this is, doesn't follow it that close, and only sees these headlines 2-3 times a year when he sticks his head out and gets on the nightly news for 30 second stories and a sound bite. That just turns people off more.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

worthless babble....

 

[sjonnie]

Sick of Lemond

I follow cycling fairly closely, since a long time I guess. I remember watching Lemond beat Fignon by 8s on the Champs Elysee and thinking that was the best thing ever. After the tedium of the Indurain years and the drug scandals, Lance was a breath of fresh air, a powerful rider, willing to attack and take risks. I thought he had style and loved watching him race. Ever since, it seems that Greg has had nothing but bad words for Lance. I don't know why, and I don't much care to know. My opinion of Greg has dropped as a result and continues to with every word of his on the subject. I mean, if there is something substantive here why does it always have to come out though L'Equipe or a leaked email. There are proper channels for allegations of drug abuse, is there any reason to suspect that these do not work?

 

[this_is_edie]

sigh.

don't they know that this onslaught is just ****ing folks off.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I follow cycling fairly closely, since a long time I guess. I remember watching Lemond beat Fignon by 8s on the Champs Elysee and thinking that was the best thing ever. After the tedium of the Indurain years and the drug scandals, Lance was a breath of fresh air, a powerful rider, willing to attack and take risks. I thought he had style and loved watching him race. Ever since, it seems that Greg has had nothing but bad words for Lance. I don't know why, and I don't much care to know. My opinion of Greg has dropped as a result and continues to with every word of his on the subject. I mean, if there is something substantive here why does it always have to come out though L'Equipe or a leaked email. There are proper channels for allegations of drug abuse, is there any reason to suspect that these do not work?

Paid flunkey alert. Everybody knows who you people are.

 

[Susan Westemeyer]

WE have enough threads on this topic.

Susan