LeMond I

[Escarabajo]

Aren't there several of the Garmin boys putting up way more than 6 W/kg?

The slipstream-fanboys would have you believe they're squeaky clean, and that's what their press agent would like you to believe. I want to hear LeMond's take on them.

The agenda isn't purely "clean up the sport." Otherwise LeMond would expand his criticism. Maybe it's 90% "clean up the sport" and 10% "I don't like these specific people."

You may have a point about Garmin.

There are still some unknowns about Wiggins performance. IMO, it is borderline. But I am not an expert. The Wiggins power numbers were for small time intervals, so it is kind of hard to predict what the "clean max" would be for Wiggins.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

The agenda isn't purely "clean up the sport." Otherwise LeMond would expand his criticism. Maybe it's 90% "clean up the sport" and 10% "I don't like these specific people."

Actually, if you watch the speech and interview at PlayTheGame, he addresses that. Too often it's the soundbites and snippets that get taken out it seems and everyone hears about those. Though I will agree, if you look at some of his actions in the past, the phone call with Stephanie McIlvain for example, he can get that way.

Greg actually did talk with JV directly at one point about Garmin, and asked him if he really thought he could pull it off, and have a clean team. I do agree though, I'd like to hear what Greg has to say about Bradley Wiggins performance. Especially as Brad is outspoken against doping.

 

[Parrot23]

Some things to throw into the pot vis at least some riders and bio-passport:

Brailsford: "The one gamble Brailsford is not prepared to take is on a rider who might be using drugs. It was reported that Team Sky dropped their interest in one "big name" rider because of such suspicions, and Brailsford suggested others have been rejected on the basis of information contained in their biological passports, introduced by the UCI 18 months ago as a way of catching cheats.

"When I talk to every rider's agent the first thing I want is the rider's consent to see their biological passport," said Brailsford. "I get all data sent over to Manchester and then our experts pick over the detail. You also look at the history of the guy, his progression over a number of years – basic stuff, intelligence gathering.

"But some of [their passports] come through and you think, 'jeez'. It makes me laugh, the audacity of some of them [whose blood values give rise to suspicion]."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jul/27/tour-de-france-team-sky-wiggins-cavendish

Escarabajo: we have 71kgs for the weight for your calculations for Wiggins.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/jul/19/bradley-wiggins-tour-de-france

 

[perico]

Just because Lemond is almost alone in this fight, it means he is a douchbag? People always seem to mock those brave souls who walk outside the norm and are almost single handedly willing to fight against injustice. At least Lemond isn't sheep like most of the world. He shows the opposite of what you accuse him of. Just because someone is a minority it doesn't mean they are wrong. Study the info before judging. Maybe we are the fools.

If other's were as couragous and as confident in who they are, we would have more people doing what Lemond, Kimmage, Kohl, Bassons, That Kelme guy, Alex Jones et al. are doing. The doping problem would be a lot smaller.

At least Lemond knows which side he is getting hit from. You fence sitters get hit by both sides. Baaa, Baaa. Follow the lead sheep (the general media) and go and walk off a cliff.

Uhh... uhhh.... uhhh.... Does LeMond believe 9/11 was an inside job? Maybe he is nuts...

 

[Escarabajo]

Escarabajo: we have 71kgs for the weight for your calculations for Wiggins.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/jul/19/bradley-wiggins-tour-de-france

Don't worry. I have corrected the later calculations based on this weight.
Thanks.

 

[TrapperJohn]

I held Greg up as one of my idols, years ago. Heck of a rider, and a real gentleman, too. At least in public.

However, he didn't get on this anti-doping kick until Armstrong eclipsed his Tour record, and his position as the preeminent American cyclist.

If he had stood up against rampant doping in the early 90's, when it would have really made a difference, I might have more respect for him. This seems like bitter grapes to me.

 

[Escarabajo]

I held Greg up as one of my idols, years ago. Heck of a rider, and a real gentleman, too. At least in public.

However, he didn't get on this anti-doping kick until Armstrong eclipsed his Tour record, and his position as the preeminent American cyclist.

If he had stood up against rampant doping in the early 90's, when it would have really made a difference, I might have more respect for him. This seems like bitter grapes to me.

Can't you see that the majority of the people were being fooled until 1998? Remember that Lemond was embracing Lance until he found out about Ferrari. Then little by little, just like every body else, after the Festina Affair, the Manzano revelations and the Operacion Puerto we all realized how rotten the sport was. It was already talked on this forum that he probably knew about the EPO just like the Amphetamins but judging by Greg's personality, he thought that he could outraced the riders doing EPO just like he was outriding the riders doing amphetamins. Later on Lemond and everybodyelse found out about the big boost that EPO gives the riders.

 

[VanceNichols]

I held Greg up as one of my idols, years ago. Heck of a rider, and a real gentleman, too. At least in public.

However, he didn't get on this anti-doping kick until Armstrong eclipsed his Tour record, and his position as the preeminent American cyclist.

If he had stood up against rampant doping in the early 90's, when it would have really made a difference, I might have more respect for him. This seems like bitter grapes to me.

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/30/sports/30iht-lemond.t.html
this is one example of LeMond talking about how doping is ruining cycling during the 1998 tour, correct me if i am wrong Trapper, but i dont think lance won the tour in 1998

 

[VanceNichols]

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=rugVAAAAIBAJ&sjid=nBMEAAAAIBAJ&dq=lemond doping&pg=1165,1530669

Here is a newspaper article about Ferrari and the link to doping in 1994, of course LeMond is going to have a grudge against whomever deals with Ferrari.

 

[Kennf1]

I held Greg up as one of my idols, years ago. Heck of a rider, and a real gentleman, too. At least in public.

However, he didn't get on this anti-doping kick until Armstrong eclipsed his Tour record, and his position as the preeminent American cyclist.

If he had stood up against rampant doping in the early 90's, when it would have really made a difference, I might have more respect for him. This seems like bitter grapes to me.

Wrong, wrong and wrong. But that's already been pointed out above. This point has been debated at length. You are correct that there was not a lot of doping discussion in the '90s. But wow, how we have learned since then. And not just From the '98 Festina affair. The investigations into Ferrari and Conconi (and others) did not come to full light until the late '90s/early 2000's.

 

[SlantParallelogram]

this is one example of LeMond talking about how doping is ruining cycling during the 1998 tour

Is it doping that is ruining cycling? Or is it the constant witch hunt that only seems to reveal that everyone is a doper?

It is the witch hunt that is ruining things. People like Greg Lemond are only fanning those flames.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Is it doping that is ruining cycling? Or is it the constant witch hunt that only seems to reveal that everyone is a doper?

It is the witch hunt that is ruining things. People like Greg Lemond are only fanning those flames.

Yeah it was better in the past, when nobody outside of cycling knew what is going on. Parents sending their kids to crazy sick "Cycling-Docs", fans being cheated etc. Its the greed of cheaters thats ruining cycling. The same as in Baseball, Track, NBA etc.! Now its time to uncover the NFL. America wake up.

 

[tockit]

I know this is a generalization, but I would say that the majority of the American public who can tell you who Lance Armstrong is when they hear his name, would never dream that he would use PED's.

The average American (I can't speak for other countries) has bought into the whole PR campaign, and the deathbed to the podium story, and want to believe that his hard 'work ethic', good training, loss of weight, and discipline made him the champion that he has became.

Granted, it is a tremendous story. The kind that gives you the warm fuzzies when you first hear about it. A guy beats stage IV cancer, recovers, and comes back and wins 7 tours. Unbelievable!

It would make a great book or movie even if it were fiction.

IMO, from following his career for almost 20 years, reading the news pieces, and learning of the drug busts in the sport along with the details of how many cyclists cheated for years without getting caught, I have came to the conclusion that Lance has to be doping, as well as probably a good portion of the pro peloton.

I'll admit, it was hard for me to swallow at first. My sister died from cancer at the age of 30, just before Lance won his 3rd tour. I needed to know that this disease wasn't a death sentence, and if you dream big enough, dreams still come true.

I was in denial for years.

I was a true, die-hard LA fan since the early 90's, before he got cancer.

I remember watching Lance on television as he watched the '97 Tour with his fiancee while Jan Ullrich dominated the race.

I remember reading about him climbing the Madone in '99 before the tour, then going home and telling his wife that he had beaten Tony Rominger's record.

I was excited about his comeback, but never dreamed he'd win the Tour.

The he won the prologue in Puy-du- Fou at the beginning of the '99 Tour. I was estatic! He then went on to win the Tour that year and I was a true died-in-the-wool Lance Armstrong fan.

Soon afterwards the doping rumours started, as they do with all Tour winners of late.

At first I bought into the loss of weight helping him climb better, then the cancer changing his drive and outlook on life.

He would never use drugs after almost dying from cancer.

Later to the French didn't like him because he was an American, and wanted to take him down.

Then the Michele Ferrari connection surfaces.

Next the Christophe Bassons and Filippo Simeoni incidents happen.

Many of LA's close former team members got popped for doping or admitted to it (Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Roberto Heras, Frankie Andreu).

Some former Tour winners were popped for doping (Pantani and Ulrich), both of whom Lance beat on several occasions.

Eventually I noticed a pattern. Usually where there's smoke, there's fire.

I started reading up on riders who had gotten busted after doping for years without getting caught, and about how they confessed that they did it.

I soon decided that LA had to be juiced to compete against, and beat those guys who were doping. My bubble had burst.

Now, I would be willing to bet any amount of money that Armstrong has, and is doping.

Sadly, he is no longer a hero of mine. I still admire his achievements and love cycling, but things arent the same.

I have also thought long and hard about the reasons he doesn't get caught doping.

Here's what I've came up with (again, just my opinion):

(1) He's a very smart guy who is both methodical and forward thinking, somewhat of a pioneer in many facets of his career.

(2) He has lots of money and popularity, which open up lots of doors not open to riders with less money and popularity.

(3) He seems to have an inner circle of people built around him that are also smart, and provide him with the resources he needs to be the best.

(4) He is a tremendous tactician, who knows how to build a team around him, and win a Grand Tour, and he is a great bike rider.

(5) He has a very sucessful training program and diet that he is adament about, and sticks to year round.

(6) Most importantly, he is one of the most driven people I have ever came across, with a tremendous work ethic, very detail oriented, and handles pressure extremely well. AKA (the Michael Jordon of cycling)

(7) Lastly, I would imagine luck is also a factor, because even with all the attributes listed above, you still have to have some luck to race 8 Tours and not get caught using PED's.

Again, all of this is just my opinion, take it for what its worth.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I know this is a generalization, but I would say that the majority of the American public who can tell you who Lance Armstrong is when they hear his name, would never dream that he would use PED's.

The average American (I can't speak for other countries) has bought into the whole PR campaign, and the deathbed to the podium story, and want to believe that his hard 'work ethic', good training, loss of weight, and discipline made him the champion that he has became.

Granted, it is a tremendous story. The kind that gives you the warm fuzzies when you first hear about it. A guy beats stage IV cancer, recovers, and comes back and wins 7 tours. Unbelievable!

It would make a great book or movie even if it were fiction.

IMO, from following his career for almost 20 years, reading the news pieces, and learning of the drug busts in the sport along with the details of how many cyclists cheated for years without getting caught, I have came to the conclusion that Lance has to be doping, as well as probably a good portion of the pro peloton.

I'll admit, it was hard for me to swallow at first. My sister died from cancer at the age of 30, just before Lance won his 3rd tour. I needed to know that this disease wasn't a death sentence, and if you dream big enough, dreams still come true.

I was in denial for years.

I was a true, die-hard LA fan since the early 90's, before he got cancer.

I remember watching Lance on television as he watched the '97 Tour with his fiancee while Jan Ulrich dominated the race.

I remember reading about him climbing the Madone in '99 before the tour, then going home and telling his wife that he had beaten Tony Rominger's record.

I was excited about his comeback, but never dreamed he'd win the Tour.

The he won the prologue in Puy-du- Fou at the beginning of the '99 Tour. I was estatic! He then went on to win the Tour that year and I was a true died-in-the-wool Lance Armstrong fan.

Soon afterwards the doping rumours started, as they do with all Tour winners of late.

At first I bought into the loss of weight helping him climb better, then the cancer changing his drive and outlook on life.

He would never use drugs after almost dying from cancer.

Later to the French didn't like him because he was an American, and wanted to take him down.

Then the Michele Ferrari connection surfaces.

Next the Christophe Bassons and Filippo Simeoni incidents happen.

Many of LA's close former team members got popped for doping or admitted to it (Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Roberto Heras, Frankie Andreu).

Some former Tour winners were popped for doping (Pantani and Ulrich), both of whom Lance beat on several occasions.

Eventually I noticed a pattern. Usually where there's smoke, there's fire.

I started reading up on riders who had gotten busted after doping for years without getting caught, and about how they confessed that they did it.

I soon decided that LA had to be juiced to compete against, and beat those guys who were doping. My bubble had burst.

Now, I would be willing to bet any amount of money that Armstrong has, and is doping.

Sadly, he is no longer a hero of mine. I still admire his achievements and love cycling, but things arent the same.

I have also thought long and hard about the reasons he doesn't get caught doping.

Here's what I've came up with (again, just my opinion):

(1) He's a very smart guy who is both methodical and forward thinking, somewhat of a pioneer in many facets of his career.

(2) He has lots of money and popularity, which open up lots of doors not open to riders with less money and popularity.

(3) He seems to have an inner circle of people built around him that are also smart, and provide him with the resources he needs to be the best.

(4) He is a tremendous tactician, who knows how to build a team around him, and win a Grand Tour, and he is a great bike rider.

(5) He has a very sucessful training program and diet that he is adament about, and sticks to year round.

(6) Most importantly, he is one of the most driven people I have ever came across, with a tremendous work ethic, very detail oriented, and handles pressure extremely well. AKA (the Michael Jordon of cycling)

(7) Lastly, I would imagine luck is also a factor, because even with all the attributes listed above, you still have to have some luck to race 8 Tours and not get caught using PED's.

Again, all of this is just my opinion, take it for what its worth.

We in Germany had the exact same problem with Jan Ullrich. But germans tend to be very very pedantic. Thats why the media, government etc. looked deep under the carpet until cycling was totally busted. If USA was going deeper into it, Lance would have fallen too (6xEpo, Cortison in 1999). At the end germany always shoots themselves in the leg. As long as USA and Spain dont keep up, cycling will never be clean.

 

[Escarabajo]

Is it doping that is ruining cycling? Or is it the constant witch hunt that only seems to reveal that everyone is a doper?

It is the witch hunt that is ruining things. People like Greg Lemond are only fanning those flames.

OK. Lemond was a dope. He used EPO. Let's turn a blind eye to doping. Let’s close this Clinic Forum. Let's do like dailypeloton.com used to do few years back and not talk about doping at all. Let's close the Bio Passport. Let's not do retro-testing so no champion can be deposed of his title. Let the rich teams pay for the best doctors and medical programs. Nobody will ever know (Like before 1998). We used to enjoy cycling so much without knowing about doping.

There. I fixed the problem for you. Are you happy now?

BTW: I need some 60 million dollar loan from you so I can build a new Pro-Tour team in Colombia (My Home Country) for three years. You know, I have to cover for medical expenses.

 

[tockit]

We in Germany had the exact same problem with Jan Ullrich. But germans tend to be very very pedantic. Thats why the media, government etc. looked deep under the carpet until cycling was totally busted. If USA was going deeper into it, Lance would have fallen too (6xEpo, Cortison in 1999). At the end germany always shoots themselves in the leg. As long as USA and Spain dont keep up, cycling will never be clean.

I don't know what their reasons are, but the UCI/WADA don't seem interested in changing and creating an effective testing method for cycling.

Like using carbon monoxide testing for autologous blood transfusions, or maybe Greg Lemond's idea of VO2 Max versus wattage output comparisons via a sealed powertap.

Its almost as if someone donated them large sums of money to turn a blind eye, and leave things status quo...

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

I don't know what their reasons are, but the UCI/WADA don't seem interested in changing and creating an effective testing method for cycling.

Like using carbon monoxide testing for autologous blood transfusions, or maybe Greg Lemond's idea of VO2 Max versus wattage output comparisons via a sealed powertap.

Its almost as if someone donated them large sums of money to turn a blind eye, and leave things status quo...

That is since **** Pound got fired by WADA (after he was going to "war" with LA. You see, LA didnt only destroyed Simoni, Lemond and Bassons, but also Pound, Andreu, Kimmage and others). Now its just another corrupt organisation.

The UCI (= WWF = NFL) always wanted to keep things under the carpet. Not only did they allow LA to bring a prescription AFTER he was positiv, but they didnt want to bring it open at all. Thanks to some investigative french journalist, this BS came out. Its like today: If Brodry had not talked, nobody would be informed of the doping products found at this years TdF.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

By the way, some months ago a german newspaper wrote about LeEquipe. They have a new president now (ASO, the owner of this newspaper AND the organizer of the TdF was not happy with all the doping stories of past years). The journalists there are not allowed to write about doping anymore. Thats why Brodry had do talk to the LeMonde-Newspaper.

The way LeEquipe did such a great investigation on LA in 2005, they just became another yellow-press-toiletpaper. Its sad that france suckx too now.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

OK. Lemond was a dope. He used EPO. Let's turn a blind eye to doping. Let’s close this Clinic Forum. Let's do like dailypeloton.com used to do few years back and not talk about doping at all. Let's close the Bio Passport. Let's not do retro-testing so no champion can be deposed of his title. Let the rich teams pay for the best doctors and medical programs. Nobody will ever know (Like before 1998). We used to enjoy cycling so much without knowing about doping.

There. I fixed the problem for you. Are you happy now?

BTW: I need some 60 million dollar loan from you so I can build a new Pro-Tour team in Colombia (My Home Country) for three years. You know, I have to cover for medical expenses.

I think 10 Mio. is enough. You just have to sign Damsgaard. He is free now.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Is it doping that is ruining cycling? Or is it the constant witch hunt that only seems to reveal that everyone is a doper?

It is the witch hunt that is ruining things. People like Greg Lemond are only fanning those flames.

It would be a 'witch hunt' if when the French customs stopped Willy Voets car they didn't find it stuffed with PED's.
It would be a 'witch hunt' if the Guarda Civil staked out Dr. Fuentes and 200 athletes didn't call by.

People like Di Luca are ruining cycling and people like - well all these riders.

So to answer your question -yes -it IS the doping that is ruining cycling.

Greg LeMond is not fanning the flame's - he is the one shouting "fire, fire" as the flames surrounding the riders and the UCI are ignored.

 

[pmcg76]

I know this is a generalization, but I would say that the majority of the American public who can tell you who Lance Armstrong is when they hear his name, would never dream that he would use PED's.

The average American (I can't speak for other countries) has bought into the whole PR campaign, and the deathbed to the podium story, and want to believe that his hard 'work ethic', good training, loss of weight, and discipline made him the champion that he has became.

Granted, it is a tremendous story. The kind that gives you the warm fuzzies when you first hear about it. A guy beats stage IV cancer, recovers, and comes back and wins 7 tours. Unbelievable!

It would make a great book or movie even if it were fiction.

IMO, from following his career for almost 20 years, reading the news pieces, and learning of the drug busts in the sport along with the details of how many cyclists cheated for years without getting caught, I have came to the conclusion that Lance has to be doping, as well as probably a good portion of the pro peloton.

I'll admit, it was hard for me to swallow at first. My sister died from cancer at the age of 30, just before Lance won his 3rd tour. I needed to know that this disease wasn't a death sentence, and if you dream big enough, dreams still come true.

I was in denial for years.

I was a true, die-hard LA fan since the early 90's, before he got cancer.

I remember watching Lance on television as he watched the '97 Tour with his fiancee while Jan Ullrich dominated the race.

I remember reading about him climbing the Madone in '99 before the tour, then going home and telling his wife that he had beaten Tony Rominger's record.

I was excited about his comeback, but never dreamed he'd win the Tour.

The he won the prologue in Puy-du- Fou at the beginning of the '99 Tour. I was estatic! He then went on to win the Tour that year and I was a true died-in-the-wool Lance Armstrong fan.

Soon afterwards the doping rumours started, as they do with all Tour winners of late.

At first I bought into the loss of weight helping him climb better, then the cancer changing his drive and outlook on life.

He would never use drugs after almost dying from cancer.

Later to the French didn't like him because he was an American, and wanted to take him down.

Then the Michele Ferrari connection surfaces.

Next the Christophe Bassons and Filippo Simeoni incidents happen.

Many of LA's close former team members got popped for doping or admitted to it (Tyler Hamilton, Floyd Landis, Roberto Heras, Frankie Andreu).

Some former Tour winners were popped for doping (Pantani and Ulrich), both of whom Lance beat on several occasions.

Eventually I noticed a pattern. Usually where there's smoke, there's fire.

I started reading up on riders who had gotten busted after doping for years without getting caught, and about how they confessed that they did it.

I soon decided that LA had to be juiced to compete against, and beat those guys who were doping. My bubble had burst.

Now, I would be willing to bet any amount of money that Armstrong has, and is doping.

Sadly, he is no longer a hero of mine. I still admire his achievements and love cycling, but things arent the same.

I have also thought long and hard about the reasons he doesn't get caught doping.

Here's what I've came up with (again, just my opinion):

(1) He's a very smart guy who is both methodical and forward thinking, somewhat of a pioneer in many facets of his career.

(2) He has lots of money and popularity, which open up lots of doors not open to riders with less money and popularity.

(3) He seems to have an inner circle of people built around him that are also smart, and provide him with the resources he needs to be the best.

(4) He is a tremendous tactician, who knows how to build a team around him, and win a Grand Tour, and he is a great bike rider.

(5) He has a very sucessful training program and diet that he is adament about, and sticks to year round.

(6) Most importantly, he is one of the most driven people I have ever came across, with a tremendous work ethic, very detail oriented, and handles pressure extremely well. AKA (the Michael Jordon of cycling)

(7) Lastly, I would imagine luck is also a factor, because even with all the attributes listed above, you still have to have some luck to race 8 Tours and not get caught using PED's.

Again, all of this is just my opinion, take it for what its worth.

This pretty much equates what most people with a bit of common sense have undergone in their attitude to Lance and doping. I know I have posted almost exactly this post in different places yet according to the fanyboys we are just haters, not people with common sense.

There are times when I think if the doping stories didnt come out and we could watch the sport innocently like I did from 89-98. However I would rather see the problem eradicated or at least kept to a minimum number of riders, its hard to see happening but I live in hope.

 

[Digger]

Is it doping that is ruining cycling? Or is it the constant witch hunt that only seems to reveal that everyone is a doper?

It is the witch hunt that is ruining things. People like Greg Lemond are only fanning those flames.

That's like saying that the police, by catching the criminals, are increasing the crime figures. Wouldn't we all be better off if they did nothing, and crime rates would be way down. Ignore it and it'll go away....

 

[Oldman]

It would be a 'witch hunt' if when the French customs stopped Willy Voets car they didn't find it stuffed with PED's.
It would be a 'witch hunt' if the Guarda Civil staked out Dr. Fuentes and 200 athletes didn't call by.

People like Di Luca are ruining cycling and people like - well all these riders.

So to answer your question -yes -it IS the doping that is ruining cycling.

Greg LeMond is not fanning the flame's - he is the one shouting "fire, fire" as the flames surrounding the riders and the UCI are ignored.

Except that he is too vehement in his identification of the ARSONIST. He knows the corruption in this, and any sports/business system. His bitterness at not being the focal point is discrediting the message. Since this is about Lemond and his waning effectiveness my conclusion is that he's shouted FIRE at the wrong times and places. The house is on fire but no one's listening.

 

[Tonester]

What the hay?!!

Has anyone ever tested Mr. Lemonds blood? If I remember back to that July summer day, the announcers picked everyone but Lemond to win that ITT. It was so suprising that the headlines read - Unbelievable, Unpredictible, Not in a Milliion years, What an American?, etc. It was so amazing that he should still be under investigation, especially based on his own criteriums. According to his bad math his own VO2 should have been astronomical and only produced with the help of drugs. period.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Except that he is too vehement in his identification of the ARSONIST. He knows the corruption in this, and any sports/business system. His bitterness at not being the focal point is discrediting the message. Since this is about Lemond and his waning effectiveness my conclusion is that he's shouted FIRE at the wrong times and places. The house is on fire but no one's listening.

"His bitterness at not being the focal point"? Where do you get this from - I really would be interested to know. I don't believe he is bitter - I do believe he is peed off and frustrated at the way the sport is.

Here are some interviews from GL - with the first from when he was at the Tour in 99.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...ond-defender-of-the-clean-machine-741318.html

In this article he doesn't even mention Armstrong!
http://www.velonews.com/article/79414

Here's another - where he responds to a question on Armstrong.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2009/0627/1224249651626.html