LeMond II

[thehog]

I was thinking exactly the same thing when looking at the Armstrong thread, I've seen a lot more varied range of opinions there. Maybe the forum is having a Prague Spring.

Berlusconi's media control has been somewhat nullified. Recently there has been minimal mod intervention or bans. Not sure how that can be seen as a bad thing. Everyone's opinion is welcome.

 

[happychappy]

Like Chris Froome doing 1600 RPM, and leaning into curves on Ventoux...

Da Dawg must have had his Iron shots.

 

[D-Queued]

Good on you for owning up to a factual error.

Would that others would do the same. We could have reasonable discussions here.

Thanks, but it really is bad form.

I have made similar statements a lot more than once or twice here.

And, I had fact-checked previously. Given that is was the 2012 Annual Report I am even more amazed and chagrined. I should have caught that, and was clearly over-reliant on conventional wisdom and word-of-mouth on something so basic and something that could be easily confirmed.

While there could be a story behind how the donation(s) were sourced, which is not uncommon for large donations, there are donation amounts in his name.

It always seemed incredibly odd that there was no apparent record of this.

Speaking of Livestrong, which has its own thread, it is surprising that the most recent annual report is for 2012 given that it is now 2015.

Dave.

 

[D-Queued]

Trek donated to Greg LeMond's bank account, confidentially

In your, agenda-driven, speculation only.

The simple truth is that LeMond sued Trek for not fulfilling their contract, not promoting his brand, and thereby 'robbing' him of legitimately deserved wealth.

Apparently the two parties agreed to settle the matter outside of court. Even if we had no insight into the settlement, it would be extremely unlikely that Trek would have provided Greg with anything above and beyond the damages he thought he had incurred. After all, that was all that he was seeking. Why would they give him more?

Only if a court had awarded punitive damages, beyond damages legitimately incurred, could you make such a statement.

Again, I know that you know better.

Dave.

 

[Digger]

It would appear to be a concerted effort by thehog and digger to troll Race Radio, who has more wisely stayed clear.

Why? Who knows.

Absolute rubbish, because I say this on twitter also. Where race doesn't follow me and I don't include his handle. Would it ever occur to you that these are my thoughts, my genuine thoughts on lemond...
If this is the type of response to people who go against common opinion on sky, Greg, froome etc, then we all need to be slower to label others as trolling.

Like hog said, my opinions on Greg have changed over the years. You find things out.
In a general sense, the forum shows all of us, and I mean us, that arguing online is as useful as pushing sh** up a hill. Once in a blue moon the other person will change their opinion, and on the contrary, both sides just get more entrenched.
But the clinic posters are good I find in terms of links, articles etc I would not have seen otherwise. And clearly we are all awesome for finding old quotes which many of us might have missed.

 

[thehog]

In your, agenda-driven, speculation only.

The simple truth is that LeMond sued Trek for not fulfilling their contract, not promoting his brand, and thereby 'robbing' him of legitimately deserved wealth.

Apparently the two parties agreed to settle the matter outside of court. Even if we had no insight into the settlement, it would be extremely unlikely that Trek would have provided Greg with anything above and beyond the damages he thought he had incurred. After all, that was all that he was seeking. Why would they give him more?

Only if a court had awarded punitive damages, beyond damages legitimately incurred, could you make such a statement.

Again, I know that you know better.

Dave.

The courts didn't want to know about the Trek/LeMond despute. They told both parties to just sort it out amongst themselves.

My personal take is that Trek for years were well aware of Armstrong's doping. But of course they could overlook that detail as they grew from a suburban American brand into a Global company.

LeMond had nothing on Armstrong or Trek. All he had was his bikes weren't selling very well and his leaked BS tape.

Alas, prior to the public knowing about Landis's omissions several in the inner scrotum of American cycling did. They knew what was likely to come. At that point Trek needed to protect Armstrong but more importantly they needed to protect the brand. Best thing to do at that point was to settle with Greg before the doping thing became public. Shut Greg down as post May 2010 that might not be possible and all of Trek's sordid details might play out in court/public.

As we know by 2012, a full 2 years later Armstrong fell to the ground and Trek then dropped him. And smart move by them they had nipped LeMond in the bud 2 years previously.

Trek wins, LeMond wins, Armstrong loses.

How much was that worth to Trek? Probably a lot as Greg has his team of pack hounds doing the negotiating on his behalf and they needed their cut also.

 

[D-Queued]

The courts didn't want to know about the Trek/LeMond despute. They told both parties to just sort it out amongst themselves.

My personal take is that Trek for years were well aware of Armstrong's doping. But of course they could overlook that detail as they grew from a suburban American brand into a Global company.

LeMond had nothing on Armstrong or Trek. All he had was his bikes weren't selling very well and his leaked BS tape.

Alas, prior to the public knowing about Landis's omissions several in the inner scrotum of American cycling did. They knew what was likely to come. At that point Trek needed to protect Armstrong but more importantly they needed to protect the brand. Best thing to do at that point was to settle with Greg before the doping thing became public. Shut Greg down as post May 2010 that might not be possible and all of Trek's sordid details might play out in court/public.

As we know by 2012, a full 2 years later Armstrong fell to the ground and Trek then dropped him. And smart move by them they had nipped LeMond in the bud 2 years previously.

Trek wins, LeMond wins, Armstrong loses.

How much was that worth to Trek? Probably a lot as Greg has his team of pack hounds doing the negotiating on his behalf and they needed their cut also.

Slow day today?

You said you were moving away from this dialog, but here you are posting arguments that are self-contradictory and forward yet more fiction.

No problems, I've been wrong before (many times). No harm done and the discussion was civil. I enjoyed the debate but time to move on and that includes myself.

LeMond had nothing on Trek, you say.

Yet, you have also said multiple times above that Trek poured money into LeMond's bank account. Even when that defies logic let alone fact.

Now, why would they do that?

OH, wait. Here is the latest cockamamie rationale.

Trek knew Armstrong was going down, so they waited for LeMond to launch a suit against them and counter sued, then - according to you alone - gave Greg a whole bunch of money as a wondrous PR play.



They tricked LeMond into launching a lawsuit because they knew Lance was going down? (trying to suppress even a small giggle)

As jam pants asked above, when were you in an accident that involved a head injury?

And, as I am sure jam pants meant it, I only ask because you used to be a lot more logical and a lot less fantasmic.

I hope we get some real news to talk about soon. Else, the way this logic path is headed we might expect something even more convoluted than disappearing twins and Jack Daniels testosterone supplementation.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Dave, considering all of the sloppy mistakes you've made on the subject, I don't think you're in a position to be throwing stones.

You're hurt, I get it. Discuss without the insults or just move on. It wasn't pretty that I had to correct all the untruths you tried to slip through.

 

[D-Queued]

Dave, considering all of the sloppy mistakes you've made on the subject, I don't think you're in a position to be throwing stones.

You're hurt, I get it. Discuss without the insults or just move on. It wasn't pretty that I had to correct all the untruths you tried to slip through.

You are right, I made an egregious mistake.

In the context of this discussion, however, it was a throwaway comment on a sidebar. Not relevant at all.

Hurt? No. I made a mistake and owned up to it. Why would I be hurt?

You, on the other hand, have been forwarding an agenda to diminish Greg on the basis of a bunch of fiction.

Now, if you really wanted to slam Greg and get broad support, you might cite the topic of the "File under "You have got to be &$(%ing kidding me?!" thread.

I mean, really? That was indefensible.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Thanks, but it really is bad form.

I have made similar statements a lot more than once or twice here.

And, I had fact-checked previously. Given that is was the 2012 Annual Report I am even more amazed and chagrined. I should have caught that, and was clearly over-reliant on conventional wisdom and word-of-mouth on something so basic and something that could be easily confirmed.

While there could be a story behind how the donation(s) were sourced, which is not uncommon for large donations, there are donation amounts in his name.

It always seemed incredibly odd that there was no apparent record of this.

Speaking of Livestrong, which has its own thread, it is surprising that the most recent annual report is for 2012 given that it is now 2015.

Dave.

Any two-bit CPA will tell you making donations to charity offers a reasonable tax deduction. More so if it's your own charity forwarding expense driven travel. The Armstrong family were probably larking the same.

Armstrong donated neigh on $10m+ to his own charity. It was well known per his personal donations. He also managed to ring in just about eveyone to make donations. Including Mr. Nike founder who has since donated $500m to cancer "research"...

I honestly think he meant well by some of it. Even if that belief was somewhat caught up in his whole make believe persona.

Make of that what you will. It's not always a two sided story. LeMond can't claim to be Peter Pan. He's done jack *** in terms of what Knight and Armstrong contributed.

$200k is nice but it's a drop in the ocean. And it came from Trek and not LeMond.

Philanthropists Phil and Penny Knight Friday pledged $500 million to kick-start a $1 billion cancer research initiative at the Knight Cancer Institute at Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU). Phil Knight, Nike co-founder and chairman, said the pledge is contingent on OHSU’s success in raising at least $500 million more for cancer within two years.

OHSU has been in ongoing conversations with the Knights about the possibility of additional investment in the Knight Cancer Institute, which the couple supported with a $100 million gift in 2008 — but Friday’s announcement was a thrilling surprise.

http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/about/foundation/giving-opportunities/knight-cancer.cfm

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Any two-bit CPA will tell you making donations to charity offers a reasonable tax deduction. More so if it's your own charity forwarding expense driven travel. The Armstrong family were probably larking the same.

Armstrong donated neigh on $10m+ to his own charity. It was well known per his personal donations. He also managed to ring in just about eveyone to make donations. Including Mr. Nike founder who has since donated $500m to cancer "research"...

I honestly think he meant well by some of it. Even if that belief was somewhat caught up in his whole make believe persona.

Make of that what you will. It's not always a two sided story. LeMond can't claim to be Peter Pan. He's done jack *** in terms of what Knight and Armstrong contributed.

$200k is nice but it's a drop in the ocean. And it came from Trek and not LeMond.



http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/about/foundation/giving-opportunities/knight-cancer.cfm

Nice job raising the cancer shield, man, I had not seen this in a good while... but it is so 2005...

It's funny how you insist on this story not being "black & white" when it's exactly what you're trying to do. You just feel the need to flip black for white, that's all. You're kidding yourself.

The "drop in the ocean" sentence just puts you in the "class acts" category. Well done. You've done this to yourself. I guess you're one of those guys ranking charities ?

 

[D-Queued]

Any two-bit CPA will tell you making donations to charity offers a reasonable tax deduction. More so if it's your own charity forwarding expense driven travel. The Armstrong family were probably larking the same.

Armstrong donated neigh on $10m+ to his own charity. It was well known per his personal donations. He also managed to ring in just about eveyone to make donations. Including Mr. Nike founder who has since donated $500m to cancer "research"...

I honestly think he meant well by some of it. Even if that belief was somewhat caught up in his whole make believe persona.

Make of that what you will. It's not always a two sided story. LeMond can't claim to be Peter Pan. He's done jack *** in terms of what Knight and Armstrong contributed.

$200k is nice but it's a drop in the ocean. And it came from Trek and not LeMond.



http://www.ohsu.edu/xd/about/foundation/giving-opportunities/knight-cancer.cfm

I know. I know.

Really cool way to 'donate' the costs of flying around on your private jet and get both a deduction and charity recognition for it. And, you can still scoop the appearance fee and pocket the entire thing.

Someone should look into that trip to see Haven, though. Not sure it was an entirely charitable thing to do.

You are right. That LeMond is really dumb. He really should have got himself one of those jets. Just think of all the fun he could have been having. In fact, shouldn't he be charging for his appearances and the use of his image in charity promotions? Just because it is a charity, doesn't mean he can't profit from it, right?

After all, isn't that why cycling is all about the money cycle?

Since 1in6 doesn't appear to provide public donor recognition, nor post donor 'award trophy' levels, I am sure you have expert insight into the level of Greg's support, though, don't you? Did you have any sense of the relative magnitude of the Trek donation to their annual budget?

Wouldn't want to be making anything else up, would you?

Odd that 1in6 appears to have revenues that exceed their expenditures, though, unlike livestrong. So, there you have it, the two charities don't seem to have anything in common.

Dave.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

BREAKING NEWS !

In all "the world is not black & white" sense, we provide the news.

This just confirmed : Lance Armstrong is minion of the Antechrist

http://velonews.competitor.com/2015/02/news/news-armstrong-
given-two-tickets-car-crash_359970

Meanwhile... a recent poll in Australia states that 100% of the wildlife there consider Greg LeMond as a God.

 

[thehog]

Do you have proofs?

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Do you have proofs?

Is it safe...?

 

[frenchfry]

Still going... Gawd. Lance Armstrong, FACT, never donated to his own charity. LOL!

Wasn't a major part of Armstrong's "donations" related to the Demand media .org/.com scam? Not sure about this at all, but going on a vague recollection that might be wrong.

 

[thehog]

Wasn't a major part of Armstrong's "donations" related to the Demand media .org/.com scam? Not sure about this at all, but going on a vague recollection that might be wrong.

No, that was part of the .com / .org structure.

But I guess it was all horribly intertwined which made the whole thing stink a lot.

 

[happychappy]

Is it safe...?

"Time for your iron shots, Mr Lemon."

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

"Time for your iron shots, Mr Lemon."

Pffff.... It's a dentist !

Because the reference might be "obscure" to some, let me explain. This a screenshot of Lawrence Olivier in "Marathon Man" where he plays an ex-nazi torturing Dustin Hoffmann while asking one single question : "Is it safe ?", to which Dustin always replies he doesn't understand the question...

That's a metaphor for thehog who, while not a nazi (le it be clear), keeps asking me the same question : "where is the proof ?" although he did not care to answer me when I asked what proof he needed. I made it clear I do not understand the question but he'll keep repeating it because he's trying to demonstrate I have absolutely no credibility (coz', you know, fans are stupid by definition).

So, in short, this is the picture :

Hog is on the right, keeping the credibility of this thread going. I'm on the left goofing around.

 

[thehog]

Proofs? Cleans?

 

[blackcat]

Pffff.... It's a dentist !

Because the reference might be "obscure" to some, let me explain. This a screenshot of Lawrence Olivier in "Marathon Man" where he plays an ex-nazi torturing Dustin Hoffmann while asking one single question : "Is it safe ?", to which Dustin always replies he doesn't understand the question...

That's a metaphor for thehog who, while not a nazi (le it be clear), keeps asking me the same question : "where is the proof ?" although he did not care to answer me when I asked what proof he needed. I made it clear I do not understand the question but he'll keep repeating it because he's trying to demonstrate I have absolutely no credibility (coz', you know, fans are stupid by definition).

So, in short, this is the picture :

Hog is on the right, keeping the credibility of this thread going. I'm on the left goofing around.

thought that was mordechai vanunu

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Proofs? Cleans?

Is it... safe ? like... safe safe ?

 

[pmcg76]

Is it... safe ? like... safe safe ?

Cannot believe you guys are engaging with King Troll, a guy who has performed more 180s than a stripper during a pole dance. All in the name of keeping the trolling going.

As for the more refined style:

"It's trolling Jim, just not as we know it"

Also funny to see people talk of hypocrisy when they have their head firmly wedged up Floyds ***

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Cannot believe you guys are engaging with King Troll, a guy who has performed more 180s than a stripper during a pole dance. All in the name of keeping the trolling going.

As for the more refined style:

"It's trolling Jim, just not as we know it"

Also funny to see people talk of hypocrisy when they have their head firmly wedged up Floyds ***

Thanks for the heads up.

Funny is the right word. At least we're now adressing the trolling, not the nonsense that goes with it.

Put it on the "newbie" syndrome and a suicidal sense of fighting spirit

 

[the sceptic]

Other countries ? including America ? can learn a lot from England. The popularity of cycling now is largely down to the investment made years ago with British Cycling. That funding produced some great athletes, including Tour de France winners Sir Bradley Wiggins and Chris Froome. I wish the US Cycling Federation would take note, because England has far exceeded what cycling in America has done in terms of participation and actually producing great athletes.

This sounds like something straight out of a Walsh book

I believed for a long time that the sport needed to be changed but only the downfall of Armstrong would allow that to happen. With new leaders, like Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI) president Brian Cookson, there are reasons to be optimistic. Now everybody will have a second thought about organising a doping programme, because effectively you?re going to get caught, going to get exposed. Now I think most riders would rather not win racers, than win something and then have it ruined about 50 years down the road.

doping stopped with Lance.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/promotio...ond-Cycling-needed-Lance-Armstrongs-fall.html