LeMond I

[mountaindew]

Hey Greg, in case you're reading this I still have your scooter.

 

[BotanyBay]

Hopefully we can just move on from this semantic rubbish, but Donkey has been used:

Race Radio
Brodeal
Berzin
Botany Bay
Von Mises

Many more references on both sides in this search:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/search.php?searchid=2120303&pp=25

It's been used and been defended against. Either way, it's a term that has appeared in discussions of LA for several years, but it would be good to drop the LA and donkey stuff from this thread and go back to discussing all the good things about LeMond instead.

On the subject of Le Mond, crap track in this link, but good photo:

http://grandplateau.bandcamp.com/track/greg-lemond-sous-la-pluie

I'd love to adopt your point of view, but I'd need to have the past experience of seeing a "program free" young Lance Armstrong on the racing scene. I'm not sure that we've ever had the pleasure of having such a control to the experiment. Greg Strock made some interesting points.

 

[Krebs cycle]

Great, so you understand the Punto reference and you read all about Festina, I assume you read Voets book.......

Ok well that is twice I've asked you to explain the relevance of Dr Punto and his 54% rule and twice you have dodged the question but instead responded with a quasi-condescending remark about my inferior knowledge of cycling history. You're the cycling historian, that's why I am asking you to explain its relevance to the debate. I respect your knowledge in that area, the least you can do is respect my knowledge and experience of elite sport physiology.

edit: take it to the other thread I created specifically so as not to derail this one.

 

[peterst6906]

I'd love to adopt your point of view, but I'd need to have the past experience of seeing a "program free" young Lance Armstrong

Why? That can be discussed in other threads. This is presumably a LeMond thread.

Nothing to do with my point of view about LA. Every other thread is polluted with LA, so why not just drop it from this thread and discuss LeMond instead?

 

[patricknd]

Why? That can be discussed in other threads. This is presumably a LeMond thread.

Nothing to do with my point of view about LA. Every other thread is polluted with LA, so why not just drop it from this thread and discuss LeMond instead?

it's always about armstrong. he owns these people

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Ok well that is twice I've asked you to explain the relevance of Dr Punto and his 54% rule and twice you have dodged the question but instead responded with a quasi-condescending remark about my inferior knowledge of cycling history. You're the cycling historian, that's why I am asking you to explain its relevance to the debate. I respect your knowledge in that area, the least you can do is respect my knowledge and experience of elite sport physiology.

edit: take it to the other thread I created specifically so as not to derail this one.

I did not dodge the question.
I told you to search the word Punto under my name here as I had already posted about it and the Punto reference was answered by someone else here too.
As for respect - it is earned.

But I will answer your query in the other thread.

 

[BotanyBay]

Why? That can be discussed in other threads. This is presumably a LeMond thread.

Nothing to do with my point of view about LA. Every other thread is polluted with LA, so why not just drop it from this thread and discuss LeMond instead?

Dude was complaining that I referred to LA as a donkey, and was asking me to stop. Just because he did not mention LA by name does not mean he was not referring to those situations.

 

[Von Mises]

Hopefully we can just move on from this semantic rubbish, but Donkey has been used:

Race Radio
Brodeal
Berzin
Botany Bay
Von Mises

Many more references on both sides in this search:

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/search.php?searchid=2120303&pp=25

It's been used and been defended against. Either way, it's a term that has appeared in discussions of LA for several years, but it would be good to drop the LA and donkey stuff from this thread and go back to discussing all the good things about LeMond instead.

On the subject of Le Mond, crap track in this link, but good photo:

http://grandplateau.bandcamp.com/track/greg-lemond-sous-la-pluie

I am using using "donkey" loosely in this context. I am not saying that Armstrong was not talented. Many have said that Armstrong could have been succesful classics rider, maybe, I dont know. But what I defiently do not believe is his ability to win GT in clean peloton. This is the context of donkey for me.

 

[thehog]

The criteria states the rider must have at least one epic career defining ride. LeMond final TT 89. Hampsten 88 Gavia. Landis 06 Morzine. Levi 10 TdS. Hamilton 02 Giro.

The list stands:

1. Greg LeMond - 3 Tours
2. Andy Hamptston - 1 Giro
3. Floyd Landis – 1 Tour 1 Paris-Nice
4. Levi Leiphiemer - 3rd Tour, 2nd Vuelta
5. Tyler Hamilton - 1 LBL, 2nd Giro

Been getting a load of PM's on this one. Questions have been ranging from "Where's George?" to "What about CVV"?

I'm planning on building this out into a Top 10. As a taster I'd say George is 6th, CVV 7th. Dave Z 10th. Alexi Grewel probably 8th.

 

[Zarvinov]

1. Greg LeMond - 3 Tours *
2. Andy Hamptston - 1 Giro *
3. Floyd Landis – 1 Tour 1 Paris-Nice **
4. Levi Leiphiemer - 3rd Tour, 2nd Vuelta **
5. Tyler Hamilton - 1 LBL, 2nd Giro **

* Did not use performance enhancing drugs during their careers.
** Used performance enhancing drugs during their careers.

 

[thehog]

* Did not use performance enhancing drugs during their careers.
** Used performance enhancing drugs during their careers.

I'm a big fan of LeMond. Probably the greatest cyclist of all time. Without the hunting accident it would be without a doubt. Clearly the greatest US cyclist of all time.

I wish there was some form of Masters Series televised so I could still see him in action.

Likewise with Landis & Hampston.

 

[ruamruam]

I'm a big fan of LeMond. Probably the greatest cyclist of all time. Without the hunting accident it would be without a doubt. Clearly the greatest US cyclist of all time.

I wish there was some form of Masters Series televised so I could still see him in action.

Likewise with Landis & Hampston.

Greatest cyclist of all time, that is stretching it a bit!

 

[peterst6906]

* Did not use performance enhancing drugs during their careers.
** Used performance enhancing drugs during their careers.

That doesn't seem to be part of Hog's criteria in assessing who is the best from the USA.

His game and his rules.

 

[blutto]

it's always about armstrong. he owns these people

...early contender for quote of the years...good one...

Cheers

blutto

 

[Zarvinov]

Tour De France - Stage 21

July 23 1989, Versailles - Paris, 24.5km/15.22miles, individual time trial.


1st - Greg Lemond : 26min 57sec ------- 54.545 kmh / 33.892 mph
2nd - Thierry Marie : 27min 30sec ------- 53.454 kmh / 33.215 mph
3rd - Laurent Fignon : 27min 55sec ------ 52.656 kmh / 32.719 mph

 

[thehog]

Greatest cyclist of all time, that is stretching it a bit!

Not really. When you look at the races he rode and the results then its up there with the Merckx, Museeuw etc.

 

[Zarvinov]

Greatest cyclist of all time, that is stretching it a bit!

Greg Lemond is without doubt "one" of the greatest cyclists of all time. And without his unfortunate hunting accident, you can be rest assured that he would of achieved a lot more success.

 

[thehog]

Greg Lemond is without doubt "one" of the greatest cyclists of all time. And without his unfortunate hunting accident, you can be rest assured that he would of achieved a lot more success.

....when you think about it minus the hunting accident; I'd say at least 5 Tours. Then add probably 1 or two more WC's. Then throw in 2-3 Giro's and perhaps a PR? Certainly give him a TdS then some US races.

I'm surprised we don't hear a lot more from him and his race days.

 

[nickel999]

....when you think about it minus the hunting accident; I'd say at least 5 Tours. Then add probably 1 or two more WC's. Then throw in 2-3 Giro's and perhaps a PR? Certainly give him a TdS then some US races.

I'm surprised we don't hear a lot more from him and his race days.

Quirky guy- there's a level of complexity to his personality that still to this day has not been revealed and may never..a fighter on the bike though.

In his personal life reserved and unassuming. Not a guy to climb into the commentating booth with Phil and Paul ,Harmon, Kelly et al...during a stage at the TDF to discuss racing.

 

[Fausto's Schnauzer]

Well! Wouldn't THAT be an interesting day in the booth?!

 

[blutto]

Not really. When you look at the races he rode and the results then its up there with the Merckx, Museeuw etc.

...actually he is not up there with Merckx, he is better, because after all, GL is a cycling god, though oddly for a god, unlucky, and Eddie was just a regular human type person who got lucky a whole lot ...and GL won all those hundreds of races ( 4 or 5 or 6 or 7 hundred if memory serves me well....and all those classics...MSR at least 10 times...P/R at least 6 times...10 to 25 or so Grand Tours...and of course the famous Nevada City Classic Crit three times...and so on and so forth...)...

...yep, right up there with Merckx on the raw numbers ...and maybe would have been even way more better if he hadn't had those unbelievable mitochondrial issues....in fact he was so good it is rumoured he won events he never even entered ( just like Connie Hawkins), which is the gold standard of real good...

....and I also heard that on the soccer pitch he was better than Pelé...and on the ice Gretzky was absolutely no match for him....and on the side he studied for and got a PhD in Quantum Mechanics...

Cheers

blutto

 

[Albatros]

Almost certainly it would have been different, but we can not claim he would have gone to win five GT's.

I hate disclaimers but here we go again: I am not poohpoohing Epo or saying "He would have lost anyway".

A huge compliment for Greg is that (especially in 1989) he wasn't the strongest in the TdF. If Lolo didn't have an incompetent manager(or should I say oldfashioned, as Guimard surely was no dunce) and if only he had used his brain he would have crushed Greg as he simply was a better athlete (No wonder with buckshot in your gizzard!).

Not only did Lemond barely hang on in the mountains (and deliciously outsprint them twice), with similar equipment Greg simply wouldn't have won. The fact that Lolo didn't use an aero helmet or tribars remain the biggest blunder in sports. They had seen them in the Giro, they saw them again in the first GT, heck it wasn't even new, they were called TRI-bars for a reason.

In 1990 something similar happened when Erik Breukink didn't wear an Aero helmet in the last TT which according to the numbers would have gotten him awfully close.

This is not to diminish Greg, instead it shows he was a winner who knew how to play the game. But he certainly wasn't the young god of the 84-86 years. Again, not surprising when shot like a turkey.


My point? Even in the pre epo 89-90 years he wasn't the strongest.. who knows what would have happened in a clean alternate universe? He could have one or two more, or he could have been boweled over by Charly Mottet for all we know.

Greg won three fantastic Tours and two majestic World Championship. No epo will change that.

Lemond was bowled over by Mottet in 1991.
But we shouldn't take Mottet into account as he is a confesed doper too.

Charly Mottet (FRA), cycliste professionnel de 1983 à 1994Charly Mottet (FRA), cycliste professionnel de 1983 à 1994
"Ça m'est arrivé de faire l'expérience d'utiliser des amphétamines et j'avoue que ça a été un échec pour moi. Ça n'apporte rien à l'effort sportif."
Sport et télé, Les liaisons secrètes, par Eric Maitrot, Ed. Flammarion, 1995.

..."I took amphetamines during my career, but they didn't have any effect on me"

http://www.ecoutedopage.fr/cas-dopage/silence-dans-rangs-une-seule-fois-89-102-11-731.html

Perhaps he should have told Willy Voet that he was taking them. Our famous masseur would surely had advised him on best compounds.

So after erasing our Charly Mottet from our list of pristine riders, who is left? Lemond only?

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>

So after erasing our Charly Mottet from our list of pristine riders, who is left? Lemond only?

Bassons

____________________

 

[Turner29]

Starr wrote:



Starr is a complete idiot in this statement. That worlds was in 1989. EPO was not "widely available" then. It wasn't even approved by the FDA until 1993:

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/04/briefing/4037b2_04_fda-aranesp-procrit.htm

"Preclinical Evidence for a Role of Erythropoietins in Tumor Progression"

Hum...

 

[Turner29]

...89 in the US and late 88 in Europe...there is a thread currently enmeshed in a debate over who was the first EPO user and the availability dates are discussed...and btw EPO from clinical trials was apparently available as early as 86...

Cheers

blutto

EPO was approved by the FDA in 1989, per the quoted document:

"EPOGEN/PROCRIT was licensed in June 1989, with the following indication: “treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure, including patients on dialysis (end stage renal disease) and patients not on dialysis.” Under a contractual agreement, Ortho Biotech LP has rights to development and marketing of Procrit for any indication other than for the treatment of anemia associated with chronic renal failure. Epogen and Procrit have identical labeling information for all approved indications based on development programs conducted by Amgen or Ortho Biotech.

Labeling was expanded in April 1993 to include a supplemental indication for the treatment of anemia associated with cancer chemotherapy."