LeMond I

[BotanyBay]

How many Ironman 70.3s did LeMond win?

Thankfully, none.

 

[mewmewmew13]

Listen to this guy.

Yes, I'm sure amateur LA was distraught about amateur Horner beating him in 1991. Yes, you really put all of us LA fanboys in our place with this gem, I tell you.

Yes, I'm betting that he was distraught.

I don't think mastersracer was trying to put you (or other fanboys) 'in your place'--- although you were quick to get worked up about it...simply sounded like he was just making a comment about his thoughts.

 

[Anonymous]

I also called you a racist and a parrot, but whose keeping score.

Yes, I question Papp's motives and it is a fact he plead guilty to distribution and testified against FL. It is a fact about what that testimony centered around, which belies his proclamations of cleanliness of his buddy. Yeah, he either is spouting what he actually knows or he is full of ****. I vote for the latter, but he keeps good company.

I have no "goods", except I question how a clean person could compete against doped competition. That is all. You etal take it hook/line/sinker that he did.

To me, that is the more interesting tangent of this whole conversation to me....about how you and your ilk seem to take this all personal when in fact I am just applying the same logic that is used throughout the clinic in my skepticism. I could give a rat's *** whether he doped or not.

I am confident nobody cares what you find interesting.

Once in a while you actually tell the truth. I believe you don't give a rats *** which makes your trolling so obvious.

But hey, keep your posts cut and paste to word. Seems like you take getting your dooshbaggery deleted personal, eh?

Above all else, remember the Challenger.

 

[Neworld]

What?

So lets recap,

Some MiniLance named Starr writes some unsubstantiated internet comments about the possibility that Lemond 'may' have been a doper and 44 pages later there is no other even loosely relevant data to support those claims or other claims. Really? And people are trying to compare GL to Lanceypants? What was that about village idiots?

Oh, I forgot the parts about ChrisE and Polish plodding away at their internet graffiti tactics...because either they don't care and/or try to make bottomless, goofy, jokes about just about anything, SSDD, 1234567, insert play on words here...what a vapid couple of dudes.

Does anyone have any hard facts that he doped, like positive tests, testimony on 60 minutes, 20 to 30 people saying the same thing, monetary donations to testing authorities, anything? Cricket, cricket.

This thread is dead, full stop.

Chewbacca, nice summary back on page 44.

 

[Jeremiah]

I am confident nobody cares what you find interesting.

Once in a while you actually tell the truth. I believe you don't give a rats *** which makes your trolling so obvious.

But hey, keep your posts cut and paste to word. Seems like you take getting your dooshbaggery deleted personal, eh?

Above all else, remember the Challenger.

I believe LeMond encountered more extraterrestrials than the Challenger did.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

So lets recap,

Some MiniLance named Starr writes some unsubstantiated internet comments about the possibility that Lemond 'may' have been a doper and 44 pages later there is no other even loosely relevant data to support those claims or other claims. Really? And people are trying to compare GL to Lanceypants? What was that about village idiots?

Oh, I forgot the parts about ChrisE and Polish plodding away at their internet graffiti tactics...because either they don't care and/or try to make bottomless, goofy, jokes about just about anything, SSDD, 1234567, insert play on words here...what a vapid couple of dudes.

Does anyone have any hard facts that he doped, like positive tests, testimony on 60 minutes, 20 to 30 people saying the same thing, monetary donations to testing authorities, anything? Cricket, cricket.

This thread is dead, full stop.

Chewbacca, nice summary back on page 44.

Susan didn't appreciate it too much, but I knew that would be the case when I wrote it.

ChrisE is here for the ego boost he gets from disparaging others. It's tiresome, and he will continually write things he doesn't believe to prove his points. In reality, he knows there is no proof of any kind that Lemond doped, and that there is plenty that Armstrong doped like a back alley junky. No person with actual knowledge of cycling thinks anything differently.

Would Lemond have won more Tours if he hadn't gotten shot? Who knows, but it's doubtful seeing how EPO clearly affected Tour results in the latter part of his career. Would Lance have won the TdF without doping? I don't think you can look at his career prior to his miracle and suggest that GT's were going to be his strong suit. However, he did win 7, which is more than anyone else.

Either way, who you think is the better rider has more to do with other factors than riding accomplishments, and seeing how it is a purely subjective assessment, fighting people like ChrisE over it is pointless. If he wants to base all of his opinions over his hatred of people who disparage Lance, that is his right. I base my opinion on my dislike of sociopaths.

 

[Neworld]

Susan didn't appreciate it too much, but I knew that would be the case when I wrote it.

ChrisE is here for the ego boost he gets from disparaging others. It's tiresome, and he will continually write things he doesn't believe to prove his points. In reality, he knows there is no proof of any kind that Lemond doped, and that there is plenty that Armstrong doped like a back alley junky. No person with actual knowledge of cycling thinks anything differently.

Would Lemond have won more Tours if he hadn't gotten shot? Who knows, but it's doubtful seeing how EPO clearly affected Tour results in the latter part of his career. Would Lance have won the TdF without doping? I don't think you can look at his career prior to his miracle and suggest that GT's were going to be his strong suit. However, he did win 7, which is more than anyone else.

Either way, who you think is the better rider has more to do with other factors than riding accomplishments, and seeing how it is a purely subjective assessment, fighting people like ChrisE over it is pointless. If he wants to base all of his opinions over his hatred of people who disparage Lance, that is his right. I base my opinion on my dislike of sociopaths.

I cannot disagree with your assessment.

I was interested in this thread because it was about GL and in the Clinic. But, after 46 pages there is no real information to say he doped; what a smearjob. I am not a GL fan but he appears to be one of the positive, prime, US racers in your history books. He was a 'real' champion, racing and winning throughout the year...by the way what races DIDN'T he ride? He was an innovator, embracing technology and not afraid to use new concepts.

He has an amazing story of his own, who appears to fight the good fight against any and all dopers, then and now. Those are qualities that the cycling world (fans and authorities) should embrace rather than disparage.

I wish Greg well and hope that he can continue to positively influence amateur and pro cycling for a long time.

 

[Anonymous]

I cannot disagree with your assessment.

I was interested in this thread because it was about GL and in the Clinic. But, after 46 pages there is no real information to say he doped; what a smearjob. I am not a GL fan but he appears to be one of the positive, prime, US racers in your history books. He was a 'real' champion, racing and winning throughout the year...by the way what races DIDN'T he ride? He was an innovator, embracing technology and not afraid to use new concepts.

He has an amazing story of his own, who appears to fight the good fight against any and all dopers, then and now. Those are qualities that the cycling world (fans and authorities) should embrace rather than disparage.

I wish Greg well and hope that he can continue to positively influence amateur and pro cycling for a long time.

This thread was actually pretty good for the first fifteen or twenty pages. Then Chris showed up and clogged the toilet.

 

[blutto]

This thread was actually pretty good for the first fifteen or twenty pages. Then Chris showed up and clogged the toilet.

...have to admit I do love the imagery that you used...it certainly paints a most accurate picture of the subject matter...and I really don't agree that blaming ChrisE for the clog is correct...

Cheers

blutto

 

[Caruut]

...have to admit I do love the imagery that you used...it certainly paints a most accurate picture of the subject matter...and I really don't agree that blaming ChrisE for the clog is correct...

Cheers

blutto

You deserve at least a bit of credit too, I suppose.

 

[Caruut]

Susan didn't appreciate it too much, but I knew that would be the case when I wrote it.

ChrisE is here for the ego boost he gets from disparaging others. It's tiresome, and he will continually write things he doesn't believe to prove his points. In reality, he knows there is no proof of any kind that Lemond doped, and that there is plenty that Armstrong doped like a back alley junky. No person with actual knowledge of cycling thinks anything differently.

Would Lemond have won more Tours if he hadn't gotten shot? Who knows, but it's doubtful seeing how EPO clearly affected Tour results in the latter part of his career. Would Lance have won the TdF without doping? I don't think you can look at his career prior to his miracle and suggest that GT's were going to be his strong suit. However, he did win 7, which is more than anyone else.

Either way, who you think is the better rider has more to do with other factors than riding accomplishments, and seeing how it is a purely subjective assessment, fighting people like ChrisE over it is pointless. If he wants to base all of his opinions over his hatred of people who disparage Lance, that is his right. I base my opinion on my dislike of sociopaths.

Anyone, that is, apart from Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil.

 

[Stravoski]

Greg Lemond is one of the greatest athletes in the history of professional cycling.

There is not a single shred of evidence to indicate that he ever took any performance enhancing drugs. Why ? Because HE NEVER DID.

You cannot put an individual on trial based on hearsay and innuendo.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Anyone, that is, apart from Merckx, Hinault and Anquetil.

I should have said "Tours" because that is what I was referring to in that sentence. I understand the confusion however.

 

[ultimobici]

Greg Lemond is one of the greatest athletes in the history of professional cycling.

There is not a single shred of evidence to indicate that he ever took any performance enhancing drugs. Why ? Because HE NEVER DID.

You cannot put an individual on trial based on hearsay and innuendo.

Oh you can, as many have shown in this thread. Good thing is Lemond has been demonstrably acquitted.

 

[Caruut]

I should have said "Tours" because that is what I was referring to in that sentence. I understand the confusion however.

His GT results timeline makes for good reading, the Tour line goes;

WD WD 36 WD, and then 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. Hmm.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

His GT results timeline makes for good reading, the Tour line goes;

WD WD 36 WD, and then 1 1 1 1 1 1 1. Hmm.

You don't believe in the miracle? Come on man, everyone knows that getting cancer is the single best thing for your conditioning that can happen to a person. Not to mention what it does for one's team. I mean, cancer inspired the entire Discovery team to make it to the bottom of Alpe de Huez in masse. I feel sorry for you people who don't believe in miracles. I really do.

 

[blutto]

You deserve at least a bit of credit too, I suppose.

...what...for trying to put GL's TT abilities into a proper perspective...whatever...

Cheers

blutto

 

[ultimobici]

...what...for trying to put GL's TT abilities into a proper perspective...whatever...

Cheers

blutto

Judging by his results, he was well above average in TT's. Second in the 1983 GP des Nations to double winner Daniel Gisiger is no mean feat. Then there's the 1984 Dauphine TT victory with a gap of 48" to second placed Phil Anderson. Look who's in fifth!

Date : 04/06/1984 - 10eme etape : Privas - Vals les Bains CLM Ind 32Km UCI

1 Lemond Greg Renault - Elf 46'18"
2 Anderson Phil Panasonic 48"
3 Ramirez Ramirez Martin-Alonso Systeme U 58"
4 Laurent Michel Coop - Mercier - Mavic 1'01"
5 Hinault Bernard La Vie Claire - Wonder - Radar 1'03"

Over a minute in 32km over Super Bernie? Not too shabby IMO!

 

[mastersracer]

...what...for trying to put GL's TT abilities into a proper perspective...whatever...

Cheers

blutto

some would suggest the proper perspective includes the fastest time trial in tour history until Zabriskie's almost 20 years later (which was shorter and came on the first stage vs. Lemond's which came on the last after a tour with weak team support). There aren't many prologues at the Tour that are as fast (I think maybe 2 or 3).

 

[blutto]

some would suggest the proper perspective includes the fastest time trial in tour history until Zabriskie's almost 20 years later (which was shorter and came on the first stage vs. Lemond's which came on the last after a tour with weak team support). There aren't many prologues at the Tour that are as fast (I think maybe 2 or 3).

...yeah that one is real interesting...a time that withstands the assaults of 20 years of the most doped and aero riders in history....and this from from a less than dominant TT'er....and then he has to retire because the doped riders he has smoked for 20 years are just too fast for him....

...hmmm...yeah, there is a certain logic to that...

Cheers

blutto

 

[blutto]

Judging by his results, he was well above average in TT's. Second in the 1983 GP des Nations to double winner Daniel Gisiger is no mean feat. Then there's the 1984 Dauphine TT victory with a gap of 48" to second placed Phil Anderson. Look who's in fifth!

Date : 04/06/1984 - 10eme etape : Privas - Vals les Bains CLM Ind 32Km UCI

1 Lemond Greg Renault - Elf 46'18"
2 Anderson Phil Panasonic 48"
3 Ramirez Ramirez Martin-Alonso Systeme U 58"
4 Laurent Michel Coop - Mercier - Mavic 1'01"
5 Hinault Bernard La Vie Claire - Wonder - Radar 1'03"

Over a minute in 32km over Super Bernie? Not too shabby IMO!

...yeah you should look at his results in that year's Tour when it really counted....this is not the work of a superman, as someone upthread labelled GL......which was my point...so sorry to have interrupted the service...

Cheers

blutto

 

[ultimobici]

...yeah that one is real interesting...a time that withstands the assaults of 20 years of the most doped and aero riders in history....and this from from a less than dominant TT'er....and then he has to retire because the doped riders he has smoked for 20 years are just too fast for him....

...hmmm...yeah, there is a certain logic to that...

Cheers

blutto

Downhill
Following wind
Possibility of wresting victory in the Tour

The first two factors are significant, the last is potentially massive.

Zabriskie only managed to go faster due to a small matter of 6 fewer kilometres in 2005.

As for your assertion that Lemond was not a dominant TT rider, very few riders can lay claim to that description. Cancellara is the only one in recent years, previously I'd contend that the names Coppi, Anquetil, Hinault & Merckx were the only others. But then they were all special and could win any race, be it a time trial or a road race.

 

[ultimobici]

...yeah you should look at his results in that year's Tour when it really counted....this is not the work of a superman, as someone upthread labelled GL......which was my point...so sorry to interrupted the service...

Cheers

blutto

So he didn't hand out a kicking to Hinault in his first Tour aged 23? What does that prove? Nothing.

Lemond was a massively talented rider whose palmares prior to his hunting accident were those of a rider on a steep upward trajectory. We can only guess at how successful he might have been if fate hadn't stepped in. No Triple Crown for Roche most likely nor a Delgado win in 88. But we'll never know. Based on his results from 82-86 he was Hinault's heir.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

...yeah that one is real interesting...a time that withstands the assaults of 20 years of the most doped and aero riders in history....and this from from a less than dominant TT'er....and then he has to retire because the doped riders he has smoked for 20 years are just too fast for him....

...hmmm...yeah, there is a certain logic to that...

Cheers

blutto

There is indeed some logic there - as the TT in 89 was a mere 24k. In the years after the TTs were at least twice that distance with most in the 50k to 60k range, unless you want to compare some of the mountain TTs ... But that would ruin your 'logic'.

 

[blutto]

Downhill
Following wind
Possibility of wresting victory in the Tour

The first two factors are significant, the last is potentially massive.

Zabriskie only managed to go faster due to a small matter of 6 fewer kilometres in 2005.

As for your assertion that Lemond was not a dominant TT rider, very few riders can lay claim to that description. Cancellara is the only one in recent years, previously I'd contend that the names Coppi, Anquetil, Hinault & Merckx were the only others. But then they were all special and could win any race, be it a time trial or a road race.

...yes, I have to agree, they were special...others, were ok, but not so special...

Cheers

blutto