LeMond I

[D-Queued]

It seems every six months a nutcracker comes along asking questions about LeMond doping, must be a coincidence.

And, the best part is, by their feigned impressionable stance, each nutcracker is trying to communicate that they are of an age where they weren't even born the last time Greg won the Tour.

So, who told them/put them up to it?

Key question: were you born before or after Star Wars?

When the response is, 'My parents have Phantom Menace on DVD', then you have your answer.

Dave.

 

[Oldman]

That bit is neither here nor there, frankly.



This bit is right on the money. I've never met a single person who has a bad word to say about Lemond, let alone insinuations of foul-play.

Actually his amateur to neo-pro credentials are extremely relevant. He was not part of either an era or team that could have provided him an artificial means to his performances. Part of the feux 90's performances were the likes of Viranque and Ciappucci riding as they never had. Few/none had the amateur credentials of Lemond.

 

[D-Queued]

Actually his amateur to neo-pro credentials are extremely relevant. He was not part of either an era or team that could have provided him an artificial means to his performances. Part of the feux 90's performances were the likes of Viranque and Ciappucci riding as they never had. Few/none had the amateur credentials of Lemond.

Let alone come from the relative obscurity of US cycling.

Arguably only someone from the Antarctic would have been more of an outsider.

There are some great vignettes of this when Greg first started competing against the highly organized Euro teams at Jr Worlds.

A bit of a recap on innate raw talent:

1977, age fifteen in his first major senior race, places second to John Howard at the Tour of Fresno (by then a five time American champ, Olympic vet, Pan Am champ, and undefeated two-time winner of the Red Zinger/Coors Classic) by ten seconds over the three stages.

1979, age 17, Gold, Silver and Bronze at the Junior Worlds - a first ever at any World Cycling Championship at any level, junior, amateur or senior.

Dave.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Let alone come from the relative obscurity of US cycling.

Arguably only someone from the Antarctic would have been more of an outsider.

There are some great vignettes of this when Greg first started competing against the highly organized Euro teams at Jr Worlds.

A bit of a recap on innate raw talent:

1977, age fifteen in his first major senior race, places second to John Howard at the Tour of Fresno (by then a five time American champ, Olympic vet, Pan Am champ, and undefeated two-time winner of the Red Zinger/Coors Classic) by ten seconds over the three stages.

1979, age 17, Gold, Silver and Bronze at the Junior Worlds - a first ever at any World Cycling Championship at any level, junior, amateur or senior.

Dave.

So, one might come to the conclusion that even riders from backwards cycling countries will show their talents from early on? And, will attract attention from top team managers? What is good will come fast?

 

[D-Queued]

So, one might come to the conclusion that even riders from backwards cycling countries will show their talents from early on? And, will attract attention from top team managers? What is good will come fast?

Certainly that is one hypothesis.

Then again, he could have been placing 4th or lower in city swim meets at the same age.

Dave.

 

[Franklin]

So, one might come to the conclusion that even riders from backwards cycling countries will show their talents from early on? And, will attract attention from top team managers? What is good will come fast?

Virenque certainly was pretty good as an Amateur and Neo, especially if you see that he couldn't TT and didn't have a sprint. Chiapucci became Italian Amateur Road Champion long before Epo was around.

Don't forget that every Pro, even the dopers, rose from the amateur ranks. Everyone of them was amongst the best of their countries Amateurs.

Lemond is a clean paragon, but a guy like Hinault didn't have such a fantastic Amateur period. Otoh most youth World Champions never became a star in the 80's.

It's not so easy as looking at someones Amateur results and then shouting "DOPER"

 

[Big Doopie]

It is only hard if you are seeking a different answer.

Dave.

One of many excellent posts. Cheers, Dave.

 

[Oldman]

Virenque certainly was pretty good as an Amateur and Neo, especially if you see that he couldn't TT and didn't have a sprint. Chiapucci became Italian Amateur Road Champion long before Epo was around.

Don't forget that every Pro, even the dopers, rose from the amateur ranks. Everyone of them was amongst the best of their countries Amateurs.

Lemond is a clean paragon, but a guy like Hinault didn't have such a fantastic Amateur period. Otoh most youth World Champions never became a star in the 80's.

It's not so easy as looking at someones Amateur results and then shouting "DOPER"

Perhaps I was being over-simplistic.
Virenques was "pretty" good but not a GC contender.
Chia pet might have won the Italian Road Championship but, and this is not a small but; many tactically good riders have won a major race and many major races are won by guys that never win another.
Consistent GT contenders don't fit into that catagory IMO. Hinault may not have had the opportunity to display his prowess until he contested a serious stage race ala" Hampsten.
The difference as Dave pointed out; Lemond may as well have come from Anarctica in terms of an supportive sporting environment. He didn't just win races; he bludgeoned the competition. He also had no model for a financially successful career.

 

[86TDFWinner]

I raced with Oliver Starr. We were both juniors when Lemond was first winning the TDF. Starr was an almost univerally disliked rider. A complete and utter loner. A talented rider with OTC pedigree, but so completely full of himself (had the "joe-pro" attitude even at age 16) that he rode completely alone. If he didn't know you from the OTC, he wouldn;t even talk to you. Now he's some self-appointed internet media guru.

LOL, and from the looks of it, a self proclaimed "doping expert" yet, provides ZERO proof to back any of it up.

 

[86TDFWinner]

So can any individual explain how exactly Greg Lemond (supposedly Mr. Clean) won the Tour De France on three occasions while competing against the best professional cyclists in the world, which, many of whom were using steroids, amphetamines, synthetic testosterone, and now for the first time the emergence of evidence that blood doping was used to enhance performance, with the admission from PDM.

It's not a pop at Lemond. But this question has to be asked and answered even though there are no evidence that Greg Lemond ever engaged in the practice of using performance enhancing drugs.

(Broken record time here-those of you who don't want to read this, look away now-my apologies to those that I'm repeating myself yet again):

Can YOU prove that he didn't win those races clean? Please provide any(FACTUAL): times/dates/who administered said doping/what he(LeMond) was on/who was around to see him do it/etc? Can YOU(not someone else, YOU) provide "proof" that he was to answer your question everyone here(including yourself) already knows the answer to? Also, you allude to him "competing against the best professional cyclists in the world", should we assume then that Hampten/Bauer/Phinney/ etc/etc were all doped to the gills back then? EVERY SINGLE RIDER, ON EVERY SINGLE TEAM was doping? Please also provide any proof on any of the riders mentioned as well. I've never read a single thing on Phinney doping, nor about Bauer or Hampsten, do you have any info on them we can see?

Why did whoever wait so long and not divulge this info by now? Surely if he had indeed "doped" as you're alluding to, wouldn't it have come out by now?

Thank you

 

[86TDFWinner]

Not a coincidence. Wait till Wiggins/Froome/Porte gets popped the Sky fans will start on LeMond as well.

This. They can't fathom anyone being "clean" winning the tour.

 

[blackcat]

^^^
needs to recognise what O2 vector doping did

/game changer

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Virenque certainly was pretty good as an Amateur and Neo, especially if you see that he couldn't TT and didn't have a sprint. Chiapucci became Italian Amateur Road Champion long before Epo was around.

Don't forget that every Pro, even the dopers, rose from the amateur ranks. Everyone of them was amongst the best of their countries Amateurs.

Lemond is a clean paragon, but a guy like Hinault didn't have such a fantastic Amateur period. Otoh most youth World Champions never became a star in the 80's.

It's not so easy as looking at someones Amateur results and then shouting "DOPER"

Perhaps you misread me.

GT winners/podium/rop ten riders often show from early on, lets say 21 till 24, that they are capable of producing the goods, sometimes in smaller stage races. Coppi, Bartali, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, LeMond, Fignon, even known epo wonders were quite good in their maiden years, of course often in short TT's and before their weightloss that is.

Dimitri Zhdanov should have switched to EPO, he would have rocked the pelotoon.

 

[Zaragon]

Just a reminder of the POTENCY of these drugs that were used during the Lemond era. Leaving out EPO that came on to the scene during the latter part of Lemond's career.

http://bikepure.org/resources/list-of-banned-substances/types-of-drugs-and-methods-used-in-cycling/



The part highlighted in red in the following quote grabs your attention :

Steroids: A primary form of cheating that has occurred in professional cycling is found in the use of performance-enhancing drugs, including anabolic steroids. There are various steroids that enhance muscle development and the kidney’s ability to produce natural EPO. Testostorone – being one of them – both accelerates the body’s EPO production ability, and aids in muscle recovery. Natural or man-made compounds that act like testosterone – such as Nandrolone, Tetrahydrogestrinone (THG), Stanozolol, Androstenedione, or DHEA – can increase muscle size, strength and power. It also increases aggression and competitiveness, and allows one to train harder, for longer.

 

[GJB123]

Just a reminder of the POTENCY of these drugs that were used during the Lemond era. Leaving out EPO that came on to the scene during the latter part of Lemond's career.

http://bikepure.org/resources/list-of-banned-substances/types-of-drugs-and-methods-used-in-cycling/



The part highlighted in red in the following quote grabs your attention :

Give it a rest already. Everybody who was anybody in the 80's and everybody who witnessed the 80's knows full well that anabolic steroids and testosterone were not game changers. Doping or not, it would always be the usual suspects who would be there or thereabouts. 80's Doping couldn't turn a donkey into a racehorse, 90's actually did so.

Common view is that it was possible to win GT's clean in 80's even against doped riders. Come the 90's you had a snowball's chance in hell even to finish top 20, let alone winning a GT.

 

[D-Queued]

Just a reminder of the POTENCY of these drugs that were used during the Lemond era. Leaving out EPO that came on to the scene during the latter part of Lemond's career.

http://bikepure.org/resources/list-of-banned-substances/types-of-drugs-and-methods-used-in-cycling/



The part highlighted in red in the following quote grabs your attention :

I get where you are coming from, and the apparent source of your personal inspiration:

Marijuana potency surpasses 10 percent, U.S. says

The average potency of marijuana, which has risen steadily for three decades, has exceeded 10 percent for the first time

Been sampling some of the Wiggins and Phelps stash?

Unfortunately, when it comes to trying to smear LeMond, you will find you are on a bad trip.

Dave.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Just a reminder of the POTENCY of these drugs that were used during the Lemond era. Leaving out EPO that came on to the scene during the latter part of Lemond's career.

http://bikepure.org/resources/list-of-banned-substances/types-of-drugs-and-methods-used-in-cycling/



The part highlighted in red in the following quote grabs your attention :

I'll ask again(since you chose to ignore it the first time, or you simply are trolling and cannot prove that LeMond doped, why not answet the question if you're so sure?):


Please provide any FACTUAL proof(that can be varified) that LeMond doped, can you do that please?


Thank you

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I'll ask again(since you chose to ignore it the first time, or you simply are trolling and cannot prove that LeMond doped, why not answet the question if you're so sure?):


Please provide any FACTUAL proof(that can be varified) that LeMond doped, can you do that please?


Thank you

Let the little kid play man, she is not worth it. A lot of bladibladibla, it is that time of the year/month.

 

[Franklin]

Perhaps you misread me.

GT winners/podium/rop ten riders often show from early on, lets say 21 till 24, that they are capable of producing the goods, sometimes in smaller stage races. Coppi, Bartali, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, LeMond, Fignon, even known epo wonders were quite good in their maiden years, of course often in short TT's and before their weightloss that is.

Absolutely true, the data points this out. My reply was probably to the wrong guy

But Virenque definitely fits the early talent mould. His first TdF was certainly very good. To throw him in with Chiapucci is just not correct. Virenque became an immediate star, whereas Chiapucci was a domestique for many years.

 

[ultimobici]

Absolutely true, the data points this out. My reply was probably to the wrong guy

But Virenque definitely fits the early talent mould. His first TdF was certainly very good. To throw him in with Chiapucci is just not correct. Virenque became an immediate star, whereas Chiapucci was a domestique for many years.

To compare the two is banal. Chiappucchi was 6 years his senior and turned pro in 85 and it is that that shows Chiappucchi up for the carthorse he was. But equally the timing shrouds Virenque's "talent" as he turned pro in 1991 just as EPO was entering the fray. Consequently any potential will forever be hidden from us. He may very well have been a true talent, but his 6 years at Festina undermines any assessment of that.

A single day in Yellow is worth SFA when you construct your career the way Tricky Dicky did thereafter.

As an aside, it is amusing that according to wikipedia, his nickname was Ricco! How appropriate!

 

[Oldman]

Absolutely true, the data points this out. My reply was probably to the wrong guy

But Virenque definitely fits the early talent mould. His first TdF was certainly very good. To throw him in with Chiapucci is just not correct. Virenque became an immediate star, whereas Chiapucci was a domestique for many years.

Virenque's TdF was an early indication that he would consume all means of PEDs according to Willy Vogt and that would make him a "star" in the hero-starved French fan pool. His distinction was also to make the no-threat escape (ala' Chiapucci) that drew little attention from legitimate GC contenders that allowed him to move up in GC.
Chiapucci took longer to "drink the whole soup" and wasn't as good a climber. Aside from that, the Virenque and Chiapucci you saw after the big busts were closer to the real riders.
It's one thing to place well in GC based on a fortunate escapade and quite another when you are a targeted contender from day one. It's always easier to win your first race than your 100th.

 

[thehog]

Virenque's TdF was an early indication that he would consume all means of PEDs according to Willy Vogt and that would make him a "star" in the hero-starved French fan pool. His distinction was also to make the no-threat escape (ala' Chiapucci) that drew little attention from legitimate GC contenders that allowed him to move up in GC.
Chiapucci took longer to "drink the whole soup" and wasn't as good a climber. Aside from that, the Virenque and Chiapucci you saw after the big busts were closer to the real riders.
It's one thing to place well in GC based on a fortunate escapade and quite another when you are a targeted contender from day one. It's always easier to win your first race than your 100th.

Virenque turned into the "long range" attack guy after his PED bust. He was never that prior. He was a genuine contender and rode with the favorites.

 

[oldcrank]

I'll ask again(since you chose to ignore it the first time, or you simply are trolling and cannot prove that WIGGINS doped, why not answer the question if you're so sure?):


Please provide any FACTUAL proof(that can be varified) that WIGGINS doped, can you do that please?


Thank you

yadda yadda yadda

 

[Oldman]

Virenque turned into the "long range" attack guy after his PED bust. He was never that prior. He was a genuine contender and rode with the favorites.

In the context of GT's his major time advances were via the long attack on climbing stages. Those signaled his darling years from my recollection. Since he couldn't TT and was most certainly jacked to the gills that disqualifies him from contention comparison to a Lemond. This is about Lemond, ultimately.

 

[ultimobici]

Virenque turned into the "long range" attack guy after his PED bust. He was never that prior. He was a genuine contender and rode with the favorites.

You and I must have watched the Tour from 92 to 97 in parallel universes. Virenque's modus operandi was the long-range attack to gain points in the KOM competition. His palmares will forever be in question for two reasons, first that he was racing in the heyday of EPO and second due to being busted in 1998. We can never know if he was any good relative to his peers. For the same reason one has to wonder how far a rider like Pascal Lino could have gone but for the likes of Virenque, Chiappucci and Riis. Sad, sad days.