LeMond I

[Semper Fidelis]

Actually, a Schwinn could only be had at an official Schwinn dealership (like the one I worked at)

Yes I should have known better. Thanks for the corrections. The reason I should have known was that I was never able to afford one!

My cousin bought one from a dealership in NewOrleans sometime around 79 or 80? I am not sure but it was one ugly *** bike. It was a brown burgandy metal flake color and I thought it was the absolute best machine I had ever seen! I think it might have been a schwinn continental but I am not sure.

7-eleven should have rode them so the european pro peloton could laugh their asses off at them.

Now back to my Beastie Boys marathon. RIP MCA.

 

[ultimobici]

Fignon confessed to testosterone use and as you say Perico Delgado more likely than not used it too.

And then you have cortisone and all the amphetamines they took to get by. Well, all except Hamstead and Lemond apparently, the two freaks coming from the US who were competing against the European freaks without the help of illegal substances or practices.

Delion & Mottet too don't forget!

BTW who's Hamstead? Andy Hampsten is his name.

 

[Albatros]

Aside from your being sceptical, you're overlooking a major difference in doping methods & effects from the 80's into the 90's.

The 80's saw a continuation of the methods of the previous decades. Amphetamines were joined by cortisone & testosterone, but all of these have a down side. It is widely believed that Hinault's lack of defence of his 82 Tour victory was forced on him by overuse of cortisone in the 83 Vuelta. That enabled him to push himself further than was prudent thus stuffing his knee.

Come 1990/91 EPO had entered the peloton's arsenal with doctors rather than the soigneurs administering it lest anyone died. It allowed almost superhuman recovery and the "bad day" was virtually banished from the GT rider's lexicon.

Lemond's performances all through his career were credible. His actions after retiring give me no doubts either. When asked if he doped the answer is an emphatic no. Despite efforts aplenty ($300kof them too!) there isn't a single whiff of it either. Armstrong's mechanic at USPS was prepared to lie for him but couldn't be persuaded to spill the beans on his former employer!

I know that Lemond competed in an era were doping was not as effective as it later became, but still, check previous Tour winners well before Hinault and see how many were clean. To me it makes much more sense to think that the ones wo have not confessed to doping are the ones who are lying rather than the other way around.

Cause doping surely gave them a competitive advantage, otherwise why use it for so many decades with its nasty side effects?

Great champions from the past took amphetamines like Coppi or Anquetil. Then you start connecting the dots. Maybe a Tour de France winner never confessed, but you learn that other great riders of his era did. And what is the most logical conclusion? That they were clean or that they never got caught or confessed to it?

 

[BotanyBay]

Fignon confessed to testosterone use and as you say Perico Delgado more likely than not used it too.

And then you have cortisone and all the amphetamines they took to get by. Well, all except Hamstead and Lemond apparently, the two freaks coming from the US who were competing against the European freaks without the help of illegal substances or practices.

This is why I started my new "What's a doper, really?" thread. I think a lot of you younger cats who got interested in cycling during the "Armstrong Era" are going to be really let down if you apply the "Doper" label too liberally. But very few people talk of their "Stimulant Era" product use.

 

[ultimobici]

I know that Lemond competed in an era were doping was not as effective as it later became, but still, check previous Tour winners well before Hinault and see how many were clean. To me it makes much more sense to think that the ones wo have not confessed to doping are the ones who are lying rather than the other way around.

Cause doping surely gave them a competitive advantage, otherwise why use it for so many decades with its nasty side effects?

Great champions from the past took amphetamines like Coppi or Anquetil. Then you start connecting the dots. Maybe a Tour de France winner never confessed, but you learn that other great riders of his era did. And what is the most logical conclusion? That they were clean or that they never got caught or confessed to it?

If Lemond had not spoken out about doping I'd be of a similar opinion. To speak out as he has both in recent years but also earlier is either a brilliant ruse to deflect attention or his conscience is clear due to a lack of doping in his past. The reason? He didn't need to do it because his physiology was perfect for stage racing. In single day races where conventional doping could give an edge he often came up short ending up on the podium but not the top step.

 

[MacRoadie]

This is why I started my new "What's a doper, really?" thread. I think a lot of you younger cats who got interested in cycling during the "Armstrong Era" are going to be really let down if you apply the "Doper" label too liberally. But very few people talk of their "Stimulant Era" product use.

Except that he gave up believing in miracles before I was born, or when Greg was about three years old.

 

[BotanyBay]

If Lemond had not spoken out about doping I'd be of a similar opinion. To speak out as he has both in recent years but also earlier is either a brilliant ruse to deflect attention or his conscience is clear due to a lack of doping in his past. The reason? He didn't need to do it because his physiology was perfect for stage racing. In single day races where conventional doping could give an edge he often came up short ending up on the podium but not the top step.

One thing is for sure, Lemond was / is not the "Omerta" kind of guy. He was not only willing to say no, he was willing to condemn perpetrators of it (his own team managers) in public via the media. In this very thread, we have an example of it dating back to 1988.

 

[BotanyBay]

Except that he gave up believing in miracles before I was born, or when Greg was about three years old.

Greg wasn't a miracle. He was a rare prodigy. Today we have "manufactured miracles".

I'm truly hoping that Taylor Phinney is a prodigy. But Och is that big, dark force of doubt.

 

[joe_papp]

...a lack of doping in his past. The reason? He didn't need to do it because his physiology was perfect for stage racing...

Right. It really is that simple but for whatever reason, Albatros and his ilk don't want to believe the truth that confronts them, or else they can't believe. I can understand that 1989 is a long time ago for people who didn't come into the sport until the Armstrong era (for example, tho don't know when Albatros took an interest in cycling), and 1983 seems like another world entirely, but then, that's part of the problem. They don't understand just how much difference there is b/w doping w/ EPO vs. doping w/ Cortisone. They also don't understand how truly unique LeMond was, maybe because they never saw him in his prime and only can picture him as an old guy w/ grey hair. Watching him on video, riding the Tour in 1986, maybe that just doesn't reveal to them clearly and definitively enough how great he was. As I said before, having ridden with him, next to him, in front of him, on his wheel, I saw first-hand the power and class and it was OBVIOUS to me - and should've been obvious to anyone who knew anything about pro cycling - how much better LeMond was than anyone else, naturally.

I can accept that it's hard for a cynic to imagine and trust in the appearance of a genetic freak among freaks (and impractical for a troll to do so), but that's what LeMond was! Plus, his freakishness was apparent from his teens, when he WAS the best bike racer in the entire COUNTRY - a kid! lol. To think that we even have to defend Greg LeMond is *** and I for one am not going to feed the troll any more. lol.

I wonder what Greg's natural blood values were (I never asked him) and how much room there was for improvement had he had access to EPO during a testing-free era? I shudder to think about it, but we're so lucky to have found cycling at such a momentous time in US-history, when the world's best rider was an American w/ a French-sounding last name, the looks of a California surfer dude, and natural talent and class on the bike that rendered even the Eastern Bloc coaches speechless.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Greg wasn't a miracle. He was a rare prodigy. Today we have "manufactured miracles".

I'm truly hoping that Taylor Phinney is a prodigy. But Och is that big, dark force of doubt.

Greg Lemond seems like the type of guy (I do not know him on a personal level) to speak out when he did not agree or did not like what he saw going on.

I want to think that Taylor Phinney is the next good thing for USA cycling. The Och angle is not a good one for many and it also make me uneasy trusting the results. Taylor Phinney comes from exceptional athletic stock so you can conclude that he has got all the natural talent naturally.

Has Greg Lemond said anything about Taylor Phinney and is progress? I am searching the interwebs but I have not seen any public statement made by him in the past regarding Taylor Phinney.

 

[joe_papp]

Steve Bauer

Two for you. Mottet & Delion.

Delion retired in 1994 aged 28 having won Lombardia & the Maillot Blanc in the 1990 Tour. Sad sad waste of talent. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilles_Delion

Mottet was a triple Grand Prix des Nations winner, triple Dauphiné winner as well as Lombardia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charly_Mottet

Here's another one: Steve Bauer

In 2004 I think it was I ran into Steve in Cuba - he was staying in the same hotel as we were. Steve was scouting routes for his touring enterprise, and Fraysse and I did our best to clue him in on the best riding around Santiago, through which we'd passed in the Vuelta a Cuba.

Maybe Bauer lied to my face, but, with the same conviction as LeMond, he denied ever having doped and especially not blood-doped. Autotransusion would've been the only thing then-available that produced the same effect as EPO, but with a much shorter duration that wasn't enough to cause wholesale change in the hierarchy of riders.

Here's a good interview w/ Bauer: http://redkiteprayer.com/tag/steve-bauer/

Has Greg Lemond said anything about Taylor Phinney and is progress? I am searching the interwebs but I have not seen any public statement made by him in the past regarding Taylor Phinney.

After the hell he and his family have suffered through as a result of speaking out concerning the last guy, I'd be surprised if LeMond risks singling out by name any high profile rider, even to express sentiment like yours, namely, that his association w/ Och' (and the core of ex-Phonaks) means one would be foolish not to at least worry about the potential for corruption.

 

[Race Radio]

Ok, we got two clean riders, Andrew Hampstead and Greg Lemond. Anyone offering three?

Eric Caritoux

 

[MacRoadie]

Delion & Mottet too don't forget!

BTW who's Hamstead? Andy Hampsten is his name.

And Mottet brought a level of style and elegance to the sometimes savage sport of bike racing. Beautiful to watch on the bike.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Delion & Mottet too don't forget!

BTW who's Hamstead? Andy Hampsten is his name.

Hamstead is a law partner here http://www.wvalaw.com/

 

[BotanyBay]

Eric Caritoux

I remember when he won the Vuelta. The Spanish fans spit upon him as he decimated their domestic riders.

 

[ultimobici]

And Mottet brought a level of style and elegance to the sometimes savage sport of bike racing. Beautiful to watch on the bike.

Bit of a treat for you then. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PP9ZSQVOyk
19'40" is through the outskirts of Milan on his way to a splendid solo win.

 

[Altitude]

I can accept that it's hard for a cynic to imagine and trust in the appearance of a genetic freak among freaks (and impractical for a troll to do so), but that's what LeMond was! Plus, his freakishness was apparent from his teens, when he WAS the best bike racer in the entire COUNTRY - a kid! lol. To think that we even have to defend Greg LeMond is *** and I for one am not going to feed the troll any more. lol.

Lol. Whoever dares to suspect that Greg Lemond was not 100% clean is obviously a "troll". Funny sh!t, that.

 

[Captain Sensible]

I watched all LeMonds victorys in the the tour and I believe he is the last multi winner of the tour that was clean.

 

[MacRoadie]

Lol. Whoever dares to suspect that Greg Lemond was not 100% clean is obviously a "troll". Funny sh!t, that.

Where is the proof that he was 1% dirty?

 

[BotanyBay]

Where is the proof that he was 1% dirty?

I became so upset at Oliver Starr because (as far as I know), he is the only rider besides Wunderboy to ever publicly level such an accusation. And he didn't have the huevos to go all the way with his accusation, (despite flashing his "I was a pro bike racer" badge for credibility). Schmuck.

Of course I've heard non-pro-racer people ponder the possibility that Greg doped, but never once did any of Greg's actual contemporaries level such an accusation. Fignon certainly could have taken such a swipe, but never did (despite a few years of being on the same team with him). Greg has remained squeaky-clean despite decades of opportunity for others in the ranks to imply otherwise.

 

[ultimobici]

I became so upset at Oliver Starr because (as far as I know), he is the only rider besides Wunderboy to ever publicly level such an accusation.

Of course I've heard non-pro-racer people ponder the possibility that Greg doped, but never once did any of Greg's actual contemporaries level such an accusation. Fignon certainly could have taken such a swipe, but never did (despite a few years of being on the same team with him). Greg has remained squeaky-clean despite decades of opportunity for others in the ranks to imply otherwise.

Nor mechanics, soigneurs, drivers, no one. He must have very deep pockets or......

 

[joe_papp]

...I appreciate especially the discussion of Indurain as the proto-Armstrong, a point I've been making for some time...

Thanks again, Max. I'm glad you liked the photo and it's refreshing to encounter someone here who actually consumes pro cycling for it sublimity, and not for the scandals orchestrated and encouraged by self-interested tabloid media who see the sport as nothing but a means to an end.

Lol. Whoever dares to suspect that Greg Lemond was not 100% clean is obviously a "troll". Funny sh!t, that.

What's funny is anyone coming here and arguing so weakly yet incessantly that LeMond must've been doped - in the absence of ANY evidence or credible allegation - when even a casual comparison of Greg's career with that of any post-Festina GT "winner" (and even that of Spain's pre-Festina proto-Armstrong, Indurain) reveals a truly stark contrast b/w natural talent and "engineered"-talent. And by virtue of its very nature, natural talent is the kind for which you can't simply substitute a box of ampoules. Well, maybe you can for a GT or two; a year or two; maybe even for more than half a decade if you organize behind an entire mafia that supports and facilitates your cheating.

But anyone who wants to know and see the truth will be able to. And that's why, no matter how much mierda is slung at LeMond, his palmarés wipe clean as if they were coated with teflon.

Greg has remained squeaky-clean despite decades of opportunity for others in the ranks to imply otherwise.

And why is this? A: Because he WAS the once-in-a-lifetime, one-in-a-million, diamond-in-the-rough natural talent that some pretender(s) wish they could convince the public was actually them.

 

[ultimobici]

And why is this? A: Because he WAS the once-in-a-lifetime, one-in-a-million, diamond-in-the-rough natural talent that some pretender(s) wish they could convince the public was actually them.

This is one of the sad things about all this. Thanks to the dopers, any talent however naturally gifted, is viewed with at best scepticism or outright disbelief. Every rider is tarred with the same filthy brush.

 

[goober]

And why is this? A: Because he WAS the once-in-a-lifetime, one-in-a-million, diamond-in-the-rough natural talent that some pretender(s) wish they could convince the public was actually them.

Yeah Joe you know this - not... He was a very very gifted rider I agree. EPO most likely not, banned substances - depends on who you ask.

 

[Albatros]

If Lemond had not spoken out about doping I'd be of a similar opinion. To speak out as he has both in recent years but also earlier is either a brilliant ruse to deflect attention or his conscience is clear due to a lack of doping in his past. The reason? He didn't need to do it because his physiology was perfect for stage racing. In single day races where conventional doping could give an edge he often came up short ending up on the podium but not the top step.

Nobody I guess will dispute the great natural talents of Lemond, but he surely is not the only truly gifted rider that has blessed the peloton. When I read the accounts of other great champions who put doping, however primitive it was in their eras, as something essential to survive in those gruelling races, I just can not digest that a clean rider would beat those exceptional riders on mineral water alone. So doping, even in the amphetamine era was as important as natural talent to win the big races.

By the way, when does the EPO era commence? Cause I have checked the average speed of the 1991 Tour and it is only half a Km per hour faster than the previous year, the last Lemond won. Curiously enough, Lemond managed only 8 seconds worse time than Indurain in a 75 km time trial in the 1991 Tour. Was Indurain also a natural talent like Lemond or it just simply shows that Greg was able to compete with the very best clean? Why Greg average speed in the TT final stage of the 89 Tour withstood the test of time for so many years even beating the average speeds of the EPO era druggies?

One thing is certain, if this bloke was clean he certainly was head and shoulders above anyone who ever competed in the race.