LeMond and Trek Settle

[montel]

Hope Greg got enough money to make up for the lost time and stress this must have caused - I am glad he settled, but would have loved to find out more details that surely would have come out in a trial just to see more of the truth come out - regardless of what the truth is.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Your username seems somehow appropriate. In two responses you've not had a single sentence that refrained from being condescending and curse-laden. You must be a real pleasure at cocktail parties.

You seem a little oversensitive to simple slang, sorry. As to the frequency, I had to look back, I'll admit to every other sentence. I'm not that hot on cocktail parties, but I've been told I can be quite witty while standing in the mud drinking beer at cross races.

Now, about your claims: It is your contention that the evidence Lemond did not use PED's is that the PED's of the day weren't as effective as the PED's from today?

The evidence is the fact that there is very little evidence or rumor that LeMond was a doper. The fact that EPO makes so much more of a difference is the reason why that evidence can be believed. Your statement with which everyone took exception was:

Originally Posted by eleven
Considering the era, it's a bit hard to believe that someone who won the tour three times did not dope.

Considering the era is why we can believe that LeMond was clean.
OK, you hang your condescending, expletive-laden hat on that Hugh Januss.

Hat hung. Have a nice day.

 

[eleven]

So is this a tacit admission that you have no evidence whatsoever of Greg having doped? No former team mates, tests anything?

I never claimed I had evidence Greg doped. And I never said Greg Doped. If you read what I wrote instead of the words everyone else is attempting to put into that post, I simply said:

"it's hard to believe he didn't."

 

[eleven]

"You seem a little oversensitive to simple slang, sorry. As to the frequency, I had to look back, I'll admit to every other sentence. I'm not that hot on cocktail parties, but I've been told I can be quite witty while standing in the mud drinking beer at cross races."

I'm not oversensitive, I would just think that someone can have a conversation without resorting to such retorts. They don't make you look any smarter, and they certainly do nothing to make your point.

"The evidence is the fact that there is very little evidence or rumor that LeMond was a doper. The fact that EPO makes so much more of a difference is the reason why that evidence can be believed. Your statement with which everyone took exception was:"

This is where we disagree. I see no reason to believe that riders wouldn't use every possible item that might improve their performance. The relative size of the marginal increase in performance isn't the point - the increase in performance is.

 

[Digger]

I never claimed I had evidence Greg doped. And I never said Greg Doped. If you read what I wrote instead of the words everyone else is attempting to put into that post, I simply said:

"it's hard to believe he didn't."

When you don't know about doping in hte sport and how it has evolved, yes i suppose it is difficult for you.

 

[Digger]

"You seem a little oversensitive to simple slang, sorry. As to the frequency, I had to look back, I'll admit to every other sentence. I'm not that hot on cocktail parties, but I've been told I can be quite witty while standing in the mud drinking beer at cross races."

I'm not oversensitive, I would just think that someone can have a conversation without resorting to such retorts. They don't make you look any smarter, and they certainly do nothing to make your point.

"The evidence is the fact that there is very little evidence or rumor that LeMond was a doper. The fact that EPO makes so much more of a difference is the reason why that evidence can be believed. Your statement with which everyone took exception was:"

This is where we disagree. I see no reason to believe that riders wouldn't use every possible item that might improve their performance. The relative size of the marginal increase in performance isn't the point - the increase in performance is.

So, there we have it....every rider is the same...every rider has the same moral compass. Brilliant.


Paul Kimmage
Charley Mottet
Graham Obree
Christophe Bassons
Andy Hampsten

these riders would take issue with you.

 

[eleven]

So, there we have it....every rider is the same...every rider has the same moral compass. Brilliant.


Paul Kimmage
Charley Mottet
Graham Obree
Christophe Bassons
Andy Hampsten

these riders would take issue with you.

I'm really not concerned with whether or not they would take issue with me.

 

[Digger]

I'm really not concerned with whether or not they would take issue with me.

Fine, they are an example of you talking absolute bullsh**

 

[eleven]

When you don't know about doping in hte sport and how it has evolved, yes i suppose it is difficult for you.

Where do you get the idea that I "don't know about doping in the sport and how it has evolved"?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Where do you get the idea that I "don't know about doping in the sport and how it has evolved"?

When you post.

 

[eleven]

Fine, they are an example of you talking absolute bullsh**

It's nice to see you learned communication skills from the same school as Hugh Januss.

 

[eleven]

When you post.

So then show me a post that demonstrates a lack of knowledge about the evolution of doping, Hugh.

and congrats on a post with no swear words and only a touch of condescension!

 

[Oncearunner8]

How do we know Greg did not dope. There were many ways to defeat a drug test during Gregs' career.

Furthermore Gregs' son is a doper, how do you explain that?

oh wow .... WTF??????????????

Does that "Furthermore" statement make you feel like a real asshat?

 

[Digger]

It's nice to see you learned communication skills from the same school as Hugh Januss.

Frustration with dealing with you.

 

[eleven]

Frustration with dealing with you.

Some self control would do you well then. If an anonymous poster on a message board of the internet is causing you such frustration, perhaps you should reconsider.

 

[Digger]

Where do you get the idea that I "don't know about doping in the sport and how it has evolved"?

EPO and a lack of understanding of how it completely changed hte doping landscape. How it was possible, prior to EPO, to win, but impossible (over a three week Grand Tour), to do it. You have no idea of the differences in benefits from EPO to amphetamines etc.
You have no evidence whatsoever against Greg. You have no idea who was clean in the 80s. You are guessing and basing these guesses on very limited knowledge.

 

[eleven]

EPO and a lack of understanding of how it completely changed hte doping landscape.

I'm well aware of how it changed the doping landscape.

In a similar vein, I'm well aware of how HGH and steroids changed the doping landscape of baseball. That doesn't mean, however, that players before the Steroid era weren't using every single trick they could to improve performance, including taking drugs. As in Cycling, the marginal increases in performance could mean substantial contract differences.

How it was possible, prior to EPO, to win, but impossible (over a three week Grand Tour), to do it. You have no idea of the differences in benefits from EPO to amphetamines etc.

I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence - are you saying it was possible prior to EPO to win clean, but now it's not?

And I'm well aware of the improved benefit from EPO vs. Amphetamines. I also find, however, that most people who donwplay the effectiveness of amphetamines have never taken amphetamines.

 

[Digger]

I'm well aware of how it changed the doping landscape.

In a similar vein, I'm well aware of how HGH and steroids changed the doping landscape of baseball. That doesn't mean, however, that players before the Steroid era weren't using every single trick they could to improve performance, including taking drugs. As in Cycling, the marginal increases in performance could mean substantial contract differences.


I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence - are you saying it was possible prior to EPO to win clean, but now it's not?

And I'm well aware of the improved benefit from EPO vs. Amphetamines. I also find, however, that most people who donwplay the effectiveness of amphetamines have never taken amphetamines.

Have you rode many Grand Tours on amphemtamines, in 35 degree heat?

Prior to EPO, yes it was possible to win a Grand Tour.

Since EPO, no Tour winner, with the possible exception of Sastre (being very kind), has not been linked to EPO.

Over 20 years, and not one shred of evidence has ever appeared against Greg.

And I;m saying to you, what do you think about those riders I mentioned who did not dope? Again, does everyone have the same moral compass?

 

[eleven]

Have you rode many Grand Tours on amphemtamines, in 35 degree heat?

Nope. Never once ever!

Have I experienced the Performance enhancement from amphetamines? You betcha!

Since EPO, no Tour winner, with the possible exception of Sastre (being very kind), has not been linked to EPO.

Well, I don't think there's a chance in hell Sastre was clean but that's a different debate...

And I;m saying to you, what do you think about those riders I mentioned who did not dope?

I'm saying it's hard to believe.

 

[pmcg76]

I'm well aware of how it changed the doping landscape.

In a similar vein, I'm well aware of how HGH and steroids changed the doping landscape of baseball. That doesn't mean, however, that players before the Steroid era weren't using every single trick they could to improve performance, including taking drugs. As in Cycling, the marginal increases in performance could mean substantial contract differences.


I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence - are you saying it was possible prior to EPO to win clean, but now it's not?

And I'm well aware of the improved benefit from EPO vs. Amphetamines. I also find, however, that most people who donwplay the effectiveness of amphetamines have never taken amphetamines.

I think you should also recognise Charly Mottet who finished 4th in 87 Tour wearing the yellow jersey along the way, 6th in 89 and 4th in 91(2 stages) and 2nd in 1990 Giro. He won the Dauphine Libere 3 times, Tour of Lombardy, Tour of Romandy, GP des Nations all during the 80s, very early 90s. I think he was world No 1 for a short period but a regular in the Top 10. Mottet was identified as a clean rider by none other than Willy Voet in Breaking the Chain.

Those are very impressive results for a clean rider, LeMond had greater physical stats than Mottet as far as I know so if Mottet could produce those results clean, there is no reason a superior clean athlete couldnt produce better results.

Voet also said that Eric Caritoux won the Vuelta in 84 completely clean even if he wasnt always clean during his career.

 

[buckwheat]

I'm well aware of how it changed the doping landscape.

No you're not. It's obvious by your posts. Also you're quite possibly an Armstong groupie.

In a similar vein, I'm well aware of how HGH and steroids changed the doping landscape of baseball. That doesn't mean, however, that players before the Steroid era weren't using every single trick they could to improve performance, including taking drugs. As in Cycling, the marginal increases in performance could mean substantial contract differences..

So this gives you the evidence that LeMond was doping? Not worth talking to you. No historical knowledge of cycling and limited reasoning ability.

I'm not sure what you mean by this sentence - are you saying it was possible prior to EPO to win clean, but now it's not?

He's saying you(a clean rider) could beat dopers in a one day race today, but that that there is absolutely no way a clean rider can beat an epo user in a GT if both riders have comparable natural ability. Prior to EPO a supremely talented rider like LeMond could beat guys on amphetamines and jacked on steroids. After EPO he had no chance in a GT because he couldn't compete with the higher "octane" and the recovery ability EPO conferred.

And I'm well aware of the improved benefit from EPO vs. Amphetamines. I also find, however, that most people who donwplay the effectiveness of amphetamines have never taken amphetamines.

I've taken amphetamines. They make the man the best he can be or they make him feel that way anyway. EPO, and steroids to a lesser extent in cycling, make a better man. I've also taken topical T, and not in competition or anywere near it time wise so I have an idea of what it can do.

Listen, when you see Lance you're free to become overcome by idolatry.

 

[Digger]

Nope. Never once ever!

Have I experienced the Performance enhancement from amphetamines? You betcha!

Well, I don't think there's a chance in hell Sastre was clean but that's a different debate...



I'm saying it's hard to believe.

Without any evidence to the contrary it isn't. But if you have an agenda, I guess it is.


Note: Willy Voet had a great line about doping. Doping in the 80s never created a champion. EPO completely changed this and turned average cyclists into champions, simply because they were willing to take copious amounts.

A doped *** never won the Derby...with EPO, this all changed.

 

[buckwheat]

I think you should also recognise Charly Mottet who finished 4th in 87 Tour wearing the yellow jersey along the way, 6th in 89 and 4th in 91(2 stages) and 2nd in 1990 Giro. He won the Dauphine Libere 3 times, Tour of Lombardy, Tour of Romandy, GP des Nations all during the 80s, very early 90s. I think he was world No 1 for a short period but a regular in the Top 10. Mottet was identified as a clean rider by none other than Willy Voet in Breaking the Chain.

Those are very impressive results for a clean rider, LeMond had greater physical stats than Mottet as far as I know so if Mottet could produce those results clean, there is no reason a superior clean athlete couldnt produce better results.

Voet also said that Eric Caritoux won the Vuelta in 84 completely clean even if he wasnt always clean during his career.

Do you know what Mottet's numbers were? I'm sure he was quite a freak.

Odd how the difference between a GT winner and a top 10 can be as small as a shot in the backside on the last rest day.

 

[Hugh Januss]

A doped *** never won the Derby...with EPO, this all changed.

Careful our 11 year old friend is very sensitive to profanity.

 

[buckwheat]

Careful our 11 year old friend is very sensitive to profanity.

He's taking amphetamines at 11?

Whoa son, give the body a chance to develop.

This new generation of Armstrong idolaters emulates his moral compass also.