LeMond II

[Bluenote]

Certainly, but whatever became of the specific interest in Michael Ball and Rock Racing?

Waaaay off topic, I realize. Apologies.

I believe it was dropped for lack of evidence. I think Juliet Macur's book gave an update. Or maybe it was "Wheelmen." Anyhow, that's my memory.

 

[thehog]

Certainly, but whatever became of the specific interest in Michael Ball and Rock Racing?

Waaaay off topic, I realize. Apologies.

Armstrong was a bigger prize one assumes? Resources better spent on him than a man in tight jeans.

More importantly, what's Nov working on these days?

Agreed, off topic but interesting all the same.

 

[Granville57]

I believe it was dropped for lack of evidence. I think Juliet Macur's book gave an update. Or maybe it was "Wheelmen." Anyhow, that's my memory.

Don't remember anything being mentioned by Macur (may have to check that). I didn't read Wheelmen though.

 

[Granville57]

I always had the sneaking suspicion that when Floyd reached out to Johan, looking for a place on Team Radio Shack, that his intentions were to capture audio or video evidence of Lance/Johan doing their dirty deeds.

That would've made for some fun reviewing.

 

[thehog]

I always had the sneaking suspicion that when Floyd reached out to Johan, looking for a place on Team Radio Shack, that his intentions were to capture audio or video evidence of Lance/Johan doing their dirty deeds.

That would've made for some fun reviewing.

Hmmmm, I don't know.

Vaughters once made some references to Frankie in the IM about "photographs" of Motoman etc. from Landis. Believe in the Kimmidge exchange is was passed off as urban myth.

JV chatterboxing again

 

[Granville57]

Vaughters once made some references to Frankie in the IM about "photographs" of Motoman etc. from Landis. Believe in the Kimmidge exchange is was passed off as urban myth.

I don't believe that ever came up in the Kimmage interview. 'Twas the "flushing the blood down the toilet" story that was revised by Floyd. Not the story of pannier pics.

 

[thehog]

I don't believe that ever came up in the Kimmage interview. 'Twas the "flushing the blood down the toilet" story that was revised by Floyd. Not the story of pannier pics.

My mistake, thanks for the correction.

You're right.

Before that interview, the only insight we had about what was really going on in the team came from two other former Postal riders, Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu and a widely reported email exchange between them in 2005…

Vaughters: funniest thing I ever heard – Johan and Lance dumped Floyd’s rest day blood refill down the toilet in front of him in last yrs tour to make him ride bad

Andreu: holy ****, I never heard that. That’s craz!!!

Yeah, I read those exchanges but I don’t...I can’t for the life of me think of what he was possibly referring to other than...In the incident on the bus, which was the last time I did a blood transfusion on that team, we were riding so well, and we were making everyone else look foolish, that the doctor gave me a half of a unit of blood and just threw the rest out. It wasn’t a malicious thing, he just said ‘Look, we need to keep this under control and the less we give you, the easier it is to manipulate.’ And I said ‘Come on, just give me the whole thing.’ And he said ‘No, we’re good enough.’ So it was nothing at all and I think that probably when I told that story to Allen Lim or to Vaughters…I wouldn’t have told that to Vaughters, that had to be hearsay, but I probably got confused with the contentious things that happened on Alpe D’Heuz a day later and it got turned into something it wasn’t. That’s just another one of those things that ended up in the press and I would look at it and get confused about what to do. I want to correct them, but if I correct them I have to tell them I actually blood doped, so I just have to ignore them like nothing happened.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2011/landiskimmage

 

[D-Queued]

CA is an all party consent state - in CA it's illegal to do what he did - in his own state it's legal for one party consent - but SM lived in Orange County CA....

I know you are, but are you really sure about that?

Perhaps it is just me, but can't one party consent be applied in the state of California where one party is involved in criminal activity? Said activity which would include extortion or blackmail?

You know, like witness intimidation? Or, like trying to covertly destroy someone's bike business? Or even drug trafficking?

Just asking. But, I am sure you have all the answers here.

Dave.

 

[Granville57]

Now that Dave has the audacity to bring this conversation back to LeMond...

I hope it's been previously raised in this thread the Federal law tends to allow for One Person Consent when recording a conversation. So if I were to record a conversation with mew, where she tells me how much cooler her cat is than BroDeal's, as long as one person consents to the recording (that would be me) then it should be OK, by Federal law, for me to have recorded that conversation.

Things might get murky though if I were to post that recording on a forum owned by a British media conglomerate, with me living one U.S. state, mew in another, and BroDeal presumable in yet another.

If I were to post it on Twitter, god only knows who would be responsible for what.







PM me if you want to know what she thinks of BroDeal's trail running shoes...

 

[MarkvW]

I know you are, but are you really sure about that?

Perhaps it is just me, but can't one party consent be applied in the state of California where one party is involved in criminal activity? Said activity which would include extortion or blackmail?

You know, like witness intimidation? Or, like trying to covertly destroy someone's bike business? Or even drug trafficking?

Just asking. But, I am sure you have all the answers here.

Dave.

I looked into this. It is not clear at all. A California case held that a Georgia broker (in a 1 party consent state) was stuck with California's two party consent rule, based on a choice of laws analysis. On the other hand, a Washington case, interpreting Washington's privacy law, concluded that the law at the place where the recording was made controls.

This is just an attempt by one of Floyd's minions to slime LeMond. Again.

 

[D-Queued]

I looked into this. It is not clear at all. A California case held that a Georgia broker (in a 1 party consent state) was stuck with California's two party consent rule, based on a choice of laws analysis. On the other hand, a Washington case, interpreting Washington's privacy law, concluded that the law at the place where the recording was made controls.

This is just an attempt by one of Floyd's minions to slime LeMond. Again.

Of course.

Quoting Fabiani and the other errors in that article (e.g. "Trial") only demonstrate how shallow this all is.

If we are going to start judging folks by their lies, then Floyd could well top Armstrong.

(Sorry to point that out to those who have been noting that they admire Floyd)

It shouldn't be challenging to observe that the FFF was arguably a much bigger lie than the vanishing twin, for example. That being one of the more egregious lies we have witnessed in all of professional cycling.

Then there was the whole falsification of the LNDD stuff.

Floyd Falsified Frequently.

Dave.

 

[timmers]

The bigger question would be how much time was wasted by Floyd's supporters especially on DP forums!

But back on topic I like Greg LeMond even though I have only been within a road width on Col de l'Iseran in '92 . Did he lie when asked by an acquaintance? It appears so. Have I done this? Yes. More importantly did he lie when under oath? It appears not but I might be mistaken and have recalled events wrongly or lied. It does appear that an acquaintance of his may have lied under oath but I guess that's okay as it wasn't LeMond!

In my view he was the first native English speaker who truly brought cycling to the Colonies through media attention so deserves to be applauded for that alone!

 

[Bluenote]

I dunno, the more people try and slam Lemond, the more sympathetic I feel towards him. It reminds me what all he went through in the "bad old days."

 

[thehog]

Of course.

Quoting Fabiani and the other errors in that article (e.g. "Trial") only demonstrate how shallow this all is.

If we are going to start judging folks by their lies, then Floyd could well top Armstrong.

(Sorry to point that out to those who have been noting that they admire Floyd)

It shouldn't be challenging to observe that the FFF was arguably a much bigger lie than the vanishing twin, for example. That being one of the more egregious lies we have witnessed in all of professional cycling.

Then there was the whole falsification of the LNDD stuff.

Floyd Falsified Frequently.

Dave.

With respect to the beaten deadhorse;

Dave, if only all of us were so perfectly well adjusted and life never threw curveballs at us which meant we never had to make decisions on the fly. Not buying it. Across the spectrum, throughout the entire story all the players have lied, behaved undesirably, made compromises and put themselves ahead of others.

Only a few have corrected those errors. And I'm not sure it's a story whereby you can delineate or measure who was bad and who was good.

I just know we wouldn't even be here discussing it, if one guy didn't put his balls and everything else on the chopping block (including criminal charges) to get the story out there.

Kudos where kudos is due. LeMond? Good guy, phenomenal cyclist but he's not a ball risker. Not tough enough.

What was Tim Cook's quote?

“We pave the sunlit path toward justice together, brick by brick. This is my brick.”

 

[Scott SoCal]

With respect to the beaten deadhorse;

Dave, if only all of us were so perfectly well adjusted and life never threw curveballs at us which meant we never had to make decisions on the fly. Not buying it. Across the spectrum, throughout the entire story all the players have lied, behaved undesirably, made compromises and put themselves ahead of others.

Only a few have corrected those errors. And I'm not sure it's a story whereby you can delineate or measure who was bad and who was good.

I just know we wouldn't even be here discussing it, if one guy didn't put his balls and everything else on the chopping block (including criminal charges) to get the story out there.

Kudos where kudos is due. LeMond? Good guy, phenomenal cyclist but he's not a ball risker. Not tough enough.

What was Tim Cook's quote?

Kudos where kudos is due. LeMond?

Yep. Kudos to LeMond in July, 2001 for publicly questioning Lance and his relationship with Ferrari. Took balls and he paid a heavy price for that.

Not tough enough.

Utter nonsense.

 

[thehog]

O

Yep. Kudos to LeMond in July, 2001 for publicly questioning Lance and his relationship with Ferrari. Took balls and he paid a heavy price for that.



Utter nonsense.

But he didn't really question him.

The following statement as printed by David Walsh:


"If Armstrong's clean, it's the greatest comeback. And if he's not, then it's the greatest fraud."

Was actually two separate question which LeMond answered independently. Walsh joined the answers together but the questions he asked lead LeMond to say what Walsh wanted.

The second question was "and if he's not?"

It's also not exactly what LeMond had said. He wasn't actually putting it on the line and questioning Lance.

But agree it was game on from that point.

 

[D-Queued]

With respect to the beaten deadhorse;

Dave, if only all of us were so perfectly well adjusted and life never threw curveballs at us which meant we never had to make decisions on the fly. Not buying it. Across the spectrum, throughout the entire story all the players have lied, behaved undesirably, made compromises and put themselves ahead of others.

Only a few have corrected those errors. And I'm not sure it's a story whereby you can delineate or measure who was bad and who was good.

I just know we wouldn't even be here discussing it, if one guy didn't put his balls and everything else on the chopping block (including criminal charges) to get the story out there.

Kudos where kudos is due. LeMond? Good guy, phenomenal cyclist but he's not a ball risker. Not tough enough.

What was Tim Cook's quote?

Nope, not buying this.

LeMond stuck his neck out publicly when nobody else would. For years.

Yes, Betsy and Frankie were honest, but that was in a deposition that came years later. They too paid dearly, but they were not the first to stick their necks out.

This thread itself is all the evidence you or anyone else needs that LeMond is still paying the price for sticking his neck out. Still having to put up with unfounded criticism and with being targeted.

Reading between the lines of your post, are you suggesting Floyd had balls?

More like Floyd had absolutely no other option.

He had fully exhausted one of the biggest scams we have seen with his BS wiki defense and Fraud For Fouls. All the while teaching Lance how to really run dirty tricks.

Lance isn't yet like Floyd, as Lance hasn't lost everything on a fool's errand.

LeMond, on the other hand, spoke up and had his business and personal affairs targeted and his record threatened by blackmail like 'I will get ten people to say you doped'.

Meanwhile, as noted, with respect to the 'lie' on taping the conversation, it turns out that what has been portrayed as illegal, by another Lance-related lie, may be perfectly justifiable in the State of California even if it was already legit in the State of Minnesota.

Are lies in the pursuit of justice bad or illegal? Aren't Prosecutors allowed to lie during Grand Jury examinations?

Reconcile that.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Nope, not buying this.

LeMond stuck his neck out publicly when nobody else would. For years.

Yes, Betsy and Frankie were honest, but that was in a deposition that came years later. They too paid dearly, but they were not the first to stick their necks out.

This thread itself is all the evidence you or anyone else needs that LeMond is still paying the price for sticking his neck out. Still having to put up with unfounded criticism and with being targeted.

Reading between the lines of your post, are you suggesting Floyd had balls?

More like Floyd had absolutely no other option.

He had fully exhausted one of the biggest scams we have seen with his BS wiki defense and Fraud For Fouls. All the while teaching Lance how to really run dirty tricks.

Lance isn't yet like Floyd, as Lance hasn't lost everything on a fool's errand.

LeMond, on the other hand, spoke up and had his business and personal affairs targeted and his record threatened by blackmail like 'I will get ten people to say you doped'.

Meanwhile, as noted, with respect to the 'lie' on taping the conversation, it turns out that what has been portrayed as illegal, by another Lance-related lie, may be perfectly justifiable in the State of California even if it was already legit in the State of Minnesota.

Are lies in the pursuit of justice bad or illegal? Aren't Prosecutors allowed to lie during Grand Jury examinations?

Reconcile that.

Dave.

Nah.

I've heard this "Floyd had no other option" story, so he confessed. Truth be told, nobody up to that point had really put it on the line like he did and then stuck with it.

Landis could have easily slipped away and said nothing like so many before him. He faced criminal charges on several fronts but still confessed.

LeMond? Faced nothing. Just a threat to his bike business. He made a "toe in water statement" which was answering Walsh's questions.

The Kimmidge interview with Landis demonstrated it wasn't a "I doped, I'm sorry" story. You got the reality.

The entire "no other option" BS is just that, BS, you still have to do it and hold it.

LeMond's put it on the line (somewhat) due to business interests.

 

[Scott SoCal]

O

But he didn't really question him.

The following statement as printed by David Walsh:


"If Armstrong's clean, it's the greatest comeback. And if he's not, then it's the greatest fraud."

Was actually two separate question which LeMond answered independently. Walsh joined the answers together but the questions he asked lead LeMond to say what Walsh wanted.

The second question was "and if he's not?"

It's also not exactly what LeMond had said. He wasn't actually putting it on the line and questioning Lance.

But agree it was game on from that point.

But he didn't really question him.

In 2001 LeMond was one of first professional cyclists of note, and the only former Tour champion, to openly express doubts over the legitimacy of Lance Armstrong's three-consecutive Tour successes. He has consistently questioned the relationship between riders and sports doctors like the Italian Michele Ferrari.

It's also not exactly what LeMond had said. He wasn't actually putting it on the line and questioning Lance.

The rumblings about Lance Armstrong's work with the controversial Italian trainer Michele Ferrari continued yesterday, when Greg LeMond, a triple winner of the Tour, summed up the feelings of many on this Tour in saying: "When Lance won the prologue to the 1999 Tour I was close to tears, but when I heard he was working with Michele Ferrari I was devastated. In the light of Lance's relationship with Ferrari, I just don't want to comment on this year's Tour. This is not sour grapes. I'm disappointed in Lance, that's all it is."

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2001/jul/30/cycling.cycling1



Not actually putting it on the line? Uh-huh.

 

[Scott SoCal]

Nah.

I've heard this "Floyd had no other option" story, so he confessed. Truth be told, nobody up to that point had really put it on the line like he did and then stuck with it.

Landis could have easily slipped away and said nothing like so many before him. He faced criminal charges on several fronts but still confessed.

LeMond? Faced nothing. Just a threat to his bike business. He made a "toe in water statement" which was answering Walsh's questions.

The Kimmidge interview with Landis demonstrated it wasn't a "I doped, I'm sorry" story. You got the reality.

The entire "no other option" BS is just that, BS, you still have to do it and hold it.

LeMond's put it on the line (somewhat) due to business interests.

I've heard this "Floyd had no other option" story, so he confessed. Truth be told, nobody up to that point had really put it on the line like he did and then stuck with it.

Landis could have easily slipped away and said nothing like so many before him. He faced criminal charges on several fronts but still confessed.

I give a lot of credit to Floyd. He talked to take down Lance and those he thought wronged him. End of.

Interesting comparison you're making... dinging Greg for not blowing the whistle when he had zero first hand knowledge but kudos to Floyd when he finally goes public with his first hand knowledge only after he felt he'd been given the shaft.

LeMond? Faced nothing. Just a threat to his bike business.

More BS. LeMond only faced a threat to his business AFTER questioning his highness. LeMond could have faced nothing by keeping his opinions of the Lance/Ferrari relationship to himself.

Remind us again, what did he do?

 

[veganrob]

Casting doubt on Lance in 2001 was huge. Lance was the feel good story that cycling was hanging their hat on. Not to mention Trek and Oakley and all the other goons behind the scene. Weisel etc. They were building an empire of fraud. Greg saying anything of any doubt is far bigger than what Floyd did. Kudos to Floyd still, but nah, don't compare to what Greg faced. He had far more to lose.

 

[Bluenote]

Lemond came out publically as a survivor of child sexual abuse. That takes - a lot - of "balls."

First Lemond was a big meanie, who screwed Landis and McIlvain. Now he's not mean enough. Which is it? More goalpost moving.

Oh wait, your opinions have just evolved since yesterday. So what will the criticism du jour be tomorrow?

 

[D-Queued]

Nah.

I've heard this "Floyd had no other option" story, so he confessed. Truth be told, nobody up to that point had really put it on the line like he did and then stuck with it.

Landis could have easily slipped away and said nothing like so many before him. He faced criminal charges on several fronts but still confessed.

LeMond? Faced nothing. Just a threat to his bike business. He made a "toe in water statement" which was answering Walsh's questions.

The Kimmidge interview with Landis demonstrated it wasn't a "I doped, I'm sorry" story. You got the reality.

The entire "no other option" BS is just that, BS, you still have to do it and hold it.

LeMond's put it on the line (somewhat) due to business interests.

Funny how the pressure on Landis kind of disappeared since the big confession, don't you think?

Or, are you still too busy reading your autographed copy of Positively False: The Real Story of How I Won the Tour de France

So, yeah, let's beat up on Greg.

Lied to Stephanie. Made an illegal recording. Wasn't tough enough. Had nothing on the line.

What a bunch of crap. But, oddly consistent for the Floyd camp. Floyd has stopped trying to make great fabrications. Why haven't you folks?

Dave.

 

[thehog]

I give a lot of credit to Floyd. He talked to take down Lance and those he thought wronged him. End of.

He did? Why does everyone concentrate on Lance?

I heard, the UCI, Ferrari, Bruyneel, CVV, Hincapie, Levi et al all mixed into the story.

Why Lance all the time? The story was in its entirety, not a 2006-we-all-stopped doping remix.

Or a JV-sol-special special.

Spare me.

 

[MarkvW]

Nah.

I've heard this "Floyd had no other option" story, so he confessed. Truth be told, nobody up to that point had really put it on the line like he did and then stuck with it.

Landis could have easily slipped away and said nothing like so many before him. He faced criminal charges on several fronts but still confessed.

LeMond? Faced nothing. Just a threat to his bike business. He made a "toe in water statement" which was answering Walsh's questions.

The Kimmidge interview with Landis demonstrated it wasn't a "I doped, I'm sorry" story. You got the reality.

The entire "no other option" BS is just that, BS, you still have to do it and hold it.

LeMond's put it on the line (somewhat) due to business interests.

Fraud "is doing it" and "holding it" for the sole purpose of taking Lance down and getting paid. That's a wonderful outcome, but it doesn't cast Fraud in any kind of a glowing light.