LeMond II

[yespatterns]

In order to win a 2 week GT ones has to have tremendous desire to win to ingore your body and mind telling you to stop, take it easy, rest, dont try hard, listen to the pain in your legs etc.....

In that case i think all GT contenders who ignore what their bodies are telling them is because the desire to win is making them override those calls.

Now yes one cannot compare what Armstrong did to win with what LeMond is known to have done to win. I will at this stage err on the side of LeMond being clean, but i am beginning to dislike his willingness to only call out Armstrong the doper and not all the others who seems to have no problem shaking their hands, pictures with, riding in cars around Paris for the fans with etc etc......I find that too much.

He cannot have my respect while he calls Armstrong bad doper and the rest good riders who had no choice.....Why did LeMond not dope if the riders have no choice? How come LeMond had a choice?

This is what Digger would call the hypocrisy of the whole sport on the Armstrong saga and others like Ricco, Frei, Jaksche, Manzano, Sayer who are all castigated as bad guy dopers, but Millar, half Garmin, Conta, Piti, Popo, Jens etc get portrayed in a light that ignores their past sporting misdameanours.

I get the hate for Armstrong, no problem, the guy was no ordinary rider who doped, he took it to the furtherest extremes possible and deserves everything that came and everything that is coming his way, but Vino who never admitted, Piti same who never admitted, Contador, all good guys to LeMond. Nah not in my book.

So it appears LeMond is prepared to whitewash riders doping in order to sell bikes? Not good.

He makes really good bikes though. Or at least he used to (my '05 Poprad is still my steed of choice). On a more serious note he has criticized plenty of other riders in the past. I think he just has an angry boner for LA, that's all.

 

[Amazinmets73]

He makes really good bikes though. Or at least he used to (my '05 Poprad is still my steed of choice). On a more serious note he has criticized plenty of other riders in the past. I think he just has an angry boner for LA, that's all.

His bikes are incredible! I ride an 853 steel Tourmalet

 

[hrotha]

Funny you mention Nibali. I agree completely with you here, but when I brought his name up here a few times that i thought he wasn't as "clean" as everyone kept claimning him to be, most shot it down. I have no proof he's dirty mind you, but too many things about his win just don't add up with me. Of course that's my opinion.

I very much doubt this happened. People here claimed Nibali was clean? When? How?

 

[BYOP88]

not sure what u mean, can you clarify?, and im being genuine, i actually dont know what u mean?

Zabriskie, Danielson, CVV, Dekker, Hesjedal

 

[Benotti69]

not sure what u mean, can you clarify?, and im being genuine, i actually dont know what u mean?

Go checkout the garmin/jv threads or just look up how many garmin riders doped......

JV
Millar
Tom D
C VdV
DZ
Dekker
Hesjedal
Nuyens
Vansummeren
Wegmann
Fernández
Langeveld
....
.......

 

[Race Radio]

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/contadors-climbing-credibility-questioned

Greg has certainly questioned some recent performances, but expecting him to launch a jihad based on climbing times is irrational.

Lets no forget Greg was very supportive of Lance when he won in 1999. Things changed when he talked to Lance's mechanic in 2000

I’ve known since probably around 2000. [Former U.S. Postal Service team mechanic] Julien Devries,, he told me everything — about the bribery, about everything.

It is easier to be confident and vocal when you have the inside scoop. Perhaps somebody needs to arrange for Greg to talk with Faustino Muñoz and Gary Blem?

 

[Merckx index]

Why did LeMond not dope if the riders have no choice? How come LeMond had a choice?

I can't find the link, but he did say once that had he not been near the end of his career when EPO use became prevalent, he might have succumbed to the temptation.

 

[the sceptic]

Greg has certainly questioned some recent performances, but expecting him to launch a jihad based on climbing times is irrational.

Lets no forget Greg was very supportive of Lance when he won in 1999. Things changed when he talked to Lance's mechanic in 2000



It is easier to be confident and vocal when you have the inside scoop. Perhaps somebody needs to arrange for Greg to talk with Faustino Muñoz and Gary Blem?

Lemond has become omerta and is now pushing the agenda of JV, Cookson, Walsh and everyone else that tries to pretend were in a new era.

Looking at the data and the speeds of racing, they are within the realm of human performance

Unless there has been a permanent 80% tailwind in the last 2 years, this is a lie. The speeds are not down from the Armstrong era, and Lemond should know that. So either he is lying or he hasnt been paying attention.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[sniper]

Unless there has been a permanent 80% tailwind in the last 2 years, this is a lie. The speeds are not down from the Armstrong era, and Lemond should know that. So either he is lying or he hasnt been paying attention.

very fair point, though as you say, he's pushing JV's agenda, and here he might just be rehashing JV's claims (like Walsh claiming Wiggins is clean because JV says so.)
I'm not sure if Lemond himself genuinely cares about speeds.
But then again he might/should definitely know better.

Go checkout the garmin/jv threads or just look up how many garmin riders doped......

JV
Millar
Tom D
C VdV
DZ
Dekker
Hesjedal
Nuyens
Vansummeren
Wegmann
Fernández
Langeveld
....
.......

+ staff's involvement in USPS doping: Lim, White, Weltz, Hesjedal's Hawaian-based doctor (keep forgetting his name). All drawn to the dark side by Lance, only to see the light under JV's inspiring guidance.

 

[veganrob]

I don't think GL has so much become omerta but I can see how you feel that. Greg has been somewhat erratic, or very erratic, on some of his statements concerning racing and doping etc. And that is being kind to him. He seems more concerned with his own legacy. His speech also appears to be kind of slow. I know he has some sort of disease but does it affect that or his thought process.
His bikes are meh. Being a bike store owner I don't care for dealer direct sales. Not being very supportive of us either.

 

[D-Queued]

In order to win a 2 week GT ones has to have tremendous desire to win to ingore your body and mind telling you to stop, take it easy, rest, dont try hard, listen to the pain in your legs etc.....

In that case i think all GT contenders who ignore what their bodies are telling them is because the desire to win is making them override those calls.

Now yes one cannot compare what Armstrong did to win with what LeMond is known to have done to win. I will at this stage err on the side of LeMond being clean, but i am beginning to dislike his willingness to only call out Armstrong the doper and not all the others who seems to have no problem shaking their hands, pictures with, riding in cars around Paris for the fans with etc etc......I find that too much.

He cannot have my respect while he calls Armstrong bad doper and the rest good riders who had no choice.....Why did LeMond not dope if the riders have no choice? How come LeMond had a choice?

This is what Digger would call the hypocrisy of the whole sport on the Armstrong saga and others like Ricco, Frei, Jaksche, Manzano, Sayer who are all castigated as bad guy dopers, but Millar, half Garmin, Conta, Piti, Popo, Jens etc get portrayed in a light that ignores their past sporting misdameanours.

I get the hate for Armstrong, no problem, the guy was no ordinary rider who doped, he took it to the furtherest extremes possible and deserves everything that came and everything that is coming his way, but Vino who never admitted, Piti same who never admitted, Contador, all good guys to LeMond. Nah not in my book.

So it appears LeMond is prepared to whitewash riders doping in order to sell bikes? Not good.

Thank you for acknowledging that.

Ok, you don't like Greg and you question where he stands.

No problem.

I am not Greg, and unlike him I really don't matter, but if there is one thing that I have personally learned about discussing doping in cycling is that your fellow cyclists actually don't appreciate it.

This especially includes discussion of Armstrong who is, without question, the worst drug cheat to ever participate in the sport. It also includes discussion of vanishing twins, the FFF / JD & Beer / drunken mice and the other absurd doping stories we have been witness to.

That is why I discuss doping here, instead of over coffee after a ride.

Fortunately I can be anonymous and am judged only on what I write. Greg can't, and isn't.

Greg is not a Ralph Nader. Should he be?

Dave.

 

[Race Radio]

The speeds are not down from the Armstrong era, and Lemond should know that. So either he is lying or he hasnt been paying attention.

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

 

[D-Queued]

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

Can I say this: You have proven our point.



Dave.

 

[the sceptic]

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

So you picked one result that suited your agenda, but you say I am cherry picking?

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

I dont want to nag but the Armstrong era was not 1997.

I personally dont bother to read what LeMond has to say about 'this cycling era', he was wrong about Armstrong in 1999, Landis in 2006; would this be three for three?

Cyclists dope, it is the hypocracy around it what bothers me.

Dont worry, I still like Greg.

 

[the sceptic]

So you picked one result that suited your agenda, but you say I am cherry picking?

Thanks for proving my point.

And I also doubt Lemond was talking about the guy that finished 45th on alpe d huez when he said performances are within human limits.

 

[Race Radio]

So you picked one result that suited your agenda, but you say I am cherry picking?

Alp d'Huez
Agrilu
Ventoux
Poggio
Zoncolan
Stelvio
Tourmalet
Geraardsbergen
Mortirolo
Marmolada
Lagos de Covadonga
Arcalis

Tell us, which of these climbs has a record that is less then 5 years old? Should be easy for an expert for you

 

[the sceptic]

Alp d'Huez
Agrilu
Ventoux
Poggio
Zoncolan
Stelvio
Tourmalet
Geraardsbergen
Mortirolo
Marmolada
Lagos de Covadonga
Arcalis

Tell us, which of these climbs has a record that is less then 5 years old? Should be easy for an expert for you

I see what you are trying to do. You really are a master at this stuff.

 

[sniper]

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

how is that interesting? It sounds like a deflection, not more.
we (including Lemond) are talking about the GT and Monument winners here, can we trust those?

what are you and Lemond arguing for?
If overall speeds are down, it might be due to the transition from full throttle EPO to microdose EPO. hallelujah. Just saying, as long as the UCI, the top teams' staff, and the testing isn't trustworthy, the overall speeds going down means little.

 

[Race Radio]

how is that interesting? It sounds like a deflection, not more.
we (including Lemond) are talking about the GT and Monument winners here, can we trust those?

Actually no, Greg has been clear that he sees the culture of the sport changing across the board. He is not just talking about winners. He has talked about how it is not mandatory not for a rider to dope like it was in the 90's. Climbing times are down. You do not have the same team organized doping that you had 10 years ago.

The sport, like any sport, will never be 100% clean......but it is much better then it was.

 

[Amazinmets73]

Only thing you have proven is you have little understanding of the sport.

Yes, speeds overall are down. In 1997 60 riders broke 45 minutes on Alp d'Huez. While the sharp end of the race still has questionable performances the majority of riders are slower then the EPO era.

It is certainly possible to cherry pick but to pretend the sport is the same as it was 10 years ago is willful ignorance.

I wonder what the average bike weight of those 60 riders was. From what I've read, in 1997 most riders would have been on 17-20 pound bikes. If that's the case, the drop in speed is even more pronounced.

 

[Race Radio]

how is that interesting? It sounds like a deflection, not more.
we (including Lemond) are talking about the GT and Monument winners here, can we trust those?

Note what I was responding to, the unsupportable claim that climbing speeds were NOT down. They are.

Greg has been clear that he sees the culture of the sport changing across the board. He is not just talking about winners. He has talked about how it is not mandatory not for a rider to dope like it was in the 90's. As a whole output is down. You do not have the same team organized doping that you had 10 years ago.

The sport, like any sport, will never be 100% clean......but it is much better then it was.

 

[Race Radio]

I wonder what the average bike weight of those 60 riders was. From what I've read, in 1997 most riders would have been on 17-20 pound bikes. If that's the case, the drop in speed is even more pronounced.

Certainly some were much heavier back then but Pantani's bike was 6.96kg (15.34lb), including the bottle cage and pedals. Weight limit today is 6.8.

 

[the sceptic]

how is that interesting? It sounds like a deflection, not more.
we (including Lemond) are talking about the GT and Monument winners here, can we trust those?

what are you and Lemond arguing for?
If overall speeds are down, it might be due to the transition from full throttle EPO to microdose EPO. hallelujah. Just saying, as long as the UCI, the top teams' staff, and the testing isn't trustworthy, the overall speeds going down means little.

Lemond is obviously talking about those who are winning.

He is saying Contador, Froome, Horner, Quintana, Nibali etc are within what is humanly possible. Which means either he is clueless (not likely), or he is lying to fit his new agenda.

Its basically Walsh all over again.

 

[Benotti69]

Actually no, Greg has been clear that he sees the culture of the sport changing across the board. He is not just talking about winners. He has talked about how it is not mandatory not for a rider to dope like it was in the 90's. Climbing times are down. You do not have the same team organized doping that you had 10 years ago.

The sport, like any sport, will never be 100% clean......but it is much better then it was.

What culture changed?

We still have Riis, Rihs, Och, Martinelli, Vino, Lefevere etc running teams.

Then we still have the doctors. Ferrari eg never stopped working.

The culture has not changed.

Why would we see team doping? No one is going to be stupid to stop a bus on a hill and take blood, but teams have had to get smarter. Keep riders guessing, keep the doping much more secretive in teams so if one rider talks they know very little.

There are over 100 derivatives of EPO in circulation. Most not detectable when microdoped.

Speeds are down slightly, not hugely and some riders matching epo era times.

Did Froome not show numbers up Ax3 Domaines higher than anyone but Armstrong? Bigger numbers than Beloki, Ullrich, Galseano, Sevilla, Botero and all these big time epo users.