LeMond I

[Dr. Maserati]

If you can not infer it, I am very sorry but I can not help.

If you have to "infer" stuff, then no, you cannot help.

 

[7_7_7_7]

Greg Lemond doping. ABSOLUTELY NO CHANCE WHATSOEVER. This guy is one of the greatest cyclists of all time. Not a shred of evidence exists to suggest that Lemond used drugs to enhance his performance. Pure natural talent. Full stop. End of story.

 

[Benotti69]

Fausto Coppi

Henri Desgrange


Anquetil


.
Eddy Merckx, Thevenet......Hinault not wanting to pass antidoping controls.....Fignon.

7 top.

Only 3 had something to say about doping but no great benefits in their quotes.

The others? Silence?

Still no evidence of Lemond doping?

But could it be that there is none and you are trolling per chance

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

So, where are the below riders that you quoted describing the "great benfits" of doping?

Anquetil

"For 50 years bike racers have been taking stimulants. Obviously we can do without them in a race, but then we will pedal 15 miles an hour (instead of 25). Since we are constantly asked to go faster and to make even greater efforts, we are obliged to take stimulants"

That sounds like a great benfit (sic).

 

[9000ft]

That sounds like a great benfit (sic).

As I've said many times before, to most of the self described "true cycling fans" who post in the clinic, the only thing worse than a filthy, cheating doper is someone who races like they're clean.

 

[Albatros]

If you have to "infer" stuff, then no, you cannot help.

My goodness me. You want a quote saying, "I would have never won the Tour without taking drugs", even though the guys are implying that they couldn't even finish the race without them.

Certainly you can not infer very well.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

That sounds like a great benfit (sic).

It also sounds madeup.
Have you ridden/raced? Go over 15mph?

As I've said many times before, to most of the self described "true cycling fans" who post in the clinic, the only thing worse than a filthy, cheating doper is someone who races like they're clean.

It doesn't matter how many times you say it - it is still a dumb statement.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

My goodness me. You want a quote saying, "I would have never won the Tour without taking drugs", even though the guys are implying that they couldn't even finish the race without them.

Certainly you can not infer very well.

I can infer that Performance Enhancing Drugs are performance enhancing from the name - but you said you had dozens of quotes of the great benefits, I was looking forward to reading them, alas.....

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

It also sounds madeup.
Have you ridden/raced? Go over 15mph?

I am sure the numbers are not exact but it is obvious he means he gets much better performance from doping then not. Would you dispute that?

 

[Albatros]

7 top.

Only 3 had something to say about doping but no great benefits in their quotes.

The others? Silence?

Still no evidence of Lemond doping?

But could it be that there is none and you are trolling per chance

There are many more. I coud bore you out with quotes from cyclist stating that no dope, no win (or implying it which is the same).

Another one.

COMPIEGNE, France (AP) - Two-time Tour de France champion Bernard Thevenet defended himself after Lance Armstrong questioned whether he deserved his yellow jerseys any more than Bjarne Riis. Thevenet, who has admitted to using steroids when he won Tour titles in'75 and '77, said doping substances were considered to be healthy supplements when he was racing. "It was thought that just like riders take vitamins, for example, they should take cortisone and anabolic steroids,"


Unluckily for Lemond he didn't compete in the seventies when taking steroids was considered a health suplement.


And Eddy Merckx was on these "supplements" too.

It is about connecting the dots. You don;t need to be told by Merckx that they were vital for him. Others have said so, taking the same substances, and some of them with no obligation whatsoever, just out of sincerity.

 

[Darryl Webster]

That it is not certainly what I deduct from reading ex cyclist accounts. And I know that overdoing some of those drugs would have been/was detrimental, but properly used were A MUST for riders to compete. By the way, steroids are still part of the staple diet of today's cyclists and if we are to believe Lemond they help tremendously . Perhaps the use of the adjetive was to give more shine to his victories , but considering that other cyclists speak wonders about it I think his assesment was probably right.

The biggest point I'm trying to make is that the PED,s of pre EPO/ Blood Banking didn't increase TOP END because they don't increase oxygen in the blood . Incidentally EPO is a steroid but not the same type of steroid as cortisone. The steroid use of old would have helped with recovery of that's there little doubt.
The use of IV,s and needles with legal contents blurs the line on what constitutes doping and is somat of a grey area. Its my belief that in GT,s this has been common practice since the early 70,s at least.
Re Lemond and his VO2 max, its also plausible that being so high it , naturally, would have given him a recovery advantage over many.
I'm not arguing that Lemond never, ever, dipped his hand in the cookie jar..we,l never know but his performances were credible rather than Incredible.

 

[Albatros]

I can infer that Performance Enhancing Drugs are performance enhancing from the name - but you said you had dozens of quotes of the great benefits, I was looking forward to reading them, alas.....

You have read just a few. Do you need specifically dozens.

I bet I can find two dozens. Wanna bet?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

You have read just a few. Do you need specifically dozens.

I bet I can find two dozens. Wanna bet?

Stating the "great benefits" of doping? Or just more of the same saying they got a sortof general type benefit? If its the latter, no don't waste my time.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I'm not arguing that Lemond never, ever, dipped his hand in the cookie jar..we,l never know but his performances were credible rather than Incredible.

Same here. His perfermances were gradulant, instead of some other cyclists we know.

 

[Albatros]

The biggest point I'm trying to make is that the PED,s of pre EPO/ Blood Banking didn't increase TOP END because they don't increase oxygen in the blood . Incidentally EPO is a steroid but not the same type of steroid as cortisone. The steroid use of old would have helped with recovery of that's there little doubt.
The use of IV,s and needles with legal contents blurs the line on what constitutes doping and is somat of a grey area. Its my belief that in GT,s this has been common practice since the early 70,s at least.
Re Lemond and his VO2 max, its also plausible that being so high it , naturally, would have given him a recovery advantage over many.
I'm not arguing that Lemond never, ever, dipped his hand in the cookie jar..we,l never know but his performances were credible rather than Incredible.

I am not saying that with EPO the gains have not improved drastically. Far from it. What I am disputing here, with the help of quotes by the guys who took them, is that before EPO the gains from drug taking were minor.

I don't believe it, they were also huge. It does not make sense to me that ex-ciclists are exagerating the benefits of forbidden substances that they took. What for?

it doesn't make any sense to me that cyclists today are still taking steroids if they have beeen proven to be of little effect to their performance, when we know that excessive use of steroids leads to help problems. Why the risk then?

They took them and they take them now because they are needed to perform at a high level, and obviously because they can evade the antidoping controls.

 

[Albatros]

Stating the "great benefits" of doping? Or just more of the same saying they got a sortof general type benefit? If its the latter, no don't waste my time.

We can not go on during a year without steroids is not a great benefit?

Instead of 25 we would go at 15?

What else do you want man.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I am not saying that with EPO the gains have not improved drastically. Far from it. What I am disputing here, with the help of quotes by the guys who took them, is that before EPO the gains from drug taking were minor.

I don't believe it, they were also huge. It does not make sense to me that ex-ciclists are exagerating the benefits of forbidden substances that they took. What for?

it doesn't make any sense to me that cyclists today are still taking steroids if they have beeen proven to be of little effect to their performance, when we know that excessive use of steroids leads to help problems. Why the risk then?

They took them and they take them now because they are needed to perform at a high level, and obviously because they can evade the antidoping controls.

When a cyclist never has a bad day, what does that tell you, as a new cycling fan of course.

When I see LeMond get beaten by Luc Leblanc my spidey sences tell me there is something fishy going on.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

What I am disputing here, with the help of quotes by the guys who took them, is that before EPO the gains from drug taking were minor.

I don't believe it, they were also huge.

Hmm, I don't agree with this. Obviously huge, great, etc.. are all subjective but I don't think pre-EPO drugs were a 'game changer'. A definite benefit but the cream could still rise to the top.

 

[Darryl Webster]

I am not saying that with EPO the gains have not improved drastically. Far from it. What I am disputing here, with the help of quotes by the guys who took them, is that before EPO the gains from drug taking were minor.

I don't believe it, they were also huge. It does not make sense to me that ex-ciclists are exagerating the benefits of forbidden substances that they took. What for?

icontrols.

It makes sense to me that they exaggerate because, compared to the riders of today, they really didn't understand the physiology . They may have been the winners all to frequently but they were not going significantly faster than a healthy , clean, well rested rider of the time.
Before the age of oxygen vector doping we frequently saw riders deliver a spectacular day at a Grand Tour and follow it up with a stunning fold.

 

[Albatros]

When a cyclist never has a bad day, what does that tell you, as a new cycling fan of course.

When I see LeMond get beaten by Luc Leblanc my spidey sences tell me there is something fishy going on.

I have been watching cycling since the Ocana days. So I know very well the limitations of drug taking before the EPO years. That doesn't mean that without taking PEDs my beloved Ocana would have never been anywhere near the podium.

 

[Albatros]

Hmm, I don't agree with this. Obviously huge, great, etc.. are all subjective but I don't think pre-EPO drugs were a 'game changer'. A definite benefit but the cream could still rise to the top.

Completely clean?

So why Merck, Fignon, Anquetil, Coppi etc took them? We are not talking about minows.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

I have been watching cycling since the Ocana days. So I know very well the limitations of drug taking before the EPO years. That doesn't mean that without taking PEDs my beloved Ocana would have never been anywhere near the podium.

Oke, got u out of the closet

Then you must have seen the change in pace circa 1990 by nobodies like Chiapucci et all. Nuff said.

I state as before, maybe LeMond took some steroids, eighties stuff, the oxigene vector was in his lungs. Old skool rider.

http://www.telegraaf.nl/telesport/tour-de-france-2012/12558275/__LeMond_over_zijn_verval__.html

I hope google translate will work...

In other words, LeMond never took the extra blood.

Too bad he never spoke out in those days, really dissapointed about that.

 

[Don't be late Pedro]

Completely clean?

So why Merck, Fignon, Anquetil, Coppi etc took them? We are not talking about minows.

I think completely clean. Sometimes doping is just as much mental as physical. iirc In Breaking the Chain, Voet tells how he gave Virenque a glucose injection rather anything stronger (unbeknownst to Virenque). That day Virenque 'road the time trial of his life'.

 

[Albatros]

I think completely clean. Sometimes doping is just as much mental as physical. iirc In Breaking the Chain, Voet tells how he gave Virenque a glucose injection rather anything stronger (unbeknownst to Virenque). That day Virenque 'road the time trial of his life'.

Well, in that very same book he says he took an stimulant and could compete for the first time in his life with first class cyclists that were beyond his level.

He says many things in his book and some of them contradictory.

And I believe the ones that make cycling look worse, of course.

By the way, imagine what kind of crook this guy must be when caught by the police agents was still trying to hide the drugs.

 

[MacRoadie]

Has anyone found any concrete evidence of LeMond doping yet?

Just checking.