LeMond II

[the sceptic]

Do you realise how much damage someone like greg does by lauding some dopers and crucifying others? (not lance I am alluding to as obviously there was far more to that)

Dopers end up with serious depression when caught in many cases - because of the lack of consistency.

Lemond has become omerta now, like everyone else who wants to be part of pro cycling.

Obviously this is hard to grasp for people who still view him as some sort of hero because they hate Lance.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Do you realise how much damage someone like greg does by lauding some dopers and crucifying others? (not lance I am alluding to as obviously there was far more to that)

Dopers end up with serious depression when caught in many cases - because of the lack of consistency.

Do you realize how much more damage still having people like Riis, Lefevere, any a myriad of other DS's, Doctors, etc in the sport is, than Greg Lemond saying that he hopes Froome is clean? Yet, here you are. Good thing there are people like Tygart out there, still trying to rid the sport of those he can get people to testify against...it'd be a pity if instead, he was just some hypocrite on twitter, and this forum, who believes that slogans like "Fu*k the hypocrisy!" do something to clean up the sport...

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Lemond has become omerta now, like everyone else who wants to be part of pro cycling.

Obviously this is hard to grasp for people who still view him as some sort of hero because they hate Lance.

...yea, because hammering on Lemond, Tygart, and Betsy is surely the path to cleaning up the sport of cycling...

EDIT: Oh yea, and make sure you praise people like Stephanie Mcilvain...

 

[Digger]

Lemond has become omerta now, like everyone else who wants to be part of pro cycling.

Obviously this is hard to grasp for people who still view him as some sort of hero because they hate Lance.

Just as well we have people with profiles like Floyd to highlight the ridiculousness of Greg and Travis....I mean Justin Gatlin, that guy has really been made pay by Travis....

 

[mewmewmew13]

Do you realise how much damage someone like greg does by lauding some dopers and crucifying others? (not lance I am alluding to as obviously there was far more to that)

Dopers end up with serious depression when caught in many cases - because of the lack of consistency.

it would be much clearer to others here if you were up front about your relationship with Floyd..you are his mouthpiece in the forum..
then it might make more sense as to why you are focusing on poleaxing Greg so intensely and ignoring others..

Pretty much most of us are against doping. Inconsistency is bad..we agree..lets get all the bad eggs out. the real enablers and users..
Picking Lemond as your main object of scorn makes no sense ..he may not be doing himself any favors by speaking so much but it is ridiculous how you decide he is a lynchpin now for cycling's demise.

 

[D-Queued]

Just as well we have people with profiles like Floyd to highlight the ridiculousness of Greg and Travis....I mean Justin Gatlin, that guy has really been made pay by Travis....

Do you have any idea how ridiculous your use of ridiculous seems to be?

Floyd doped to the extreme. Not even in moderation. His success was a fraud. Then, when caught, tried to burn everything - and everyone - to the ground.

But, we should blame someone else for all of that?

Dave.

 

[thehog]

Do you have any idea how ridiculous your use of ridiculous seems to be?

Floyd doped to the extreme. Not even in moderation. His success was a fraud. Then, when caught, tried to burn everything - and everyone - to the ground.

But, we should blame someone else for all of that?

Dave.

You're a dumbo. What's this "doped to the extreme" buisness? How does one dope regularly compared to "extreme" doping? Sounds to me like you're embellishing the story for effect.

Landis didn't burn anything down. He just told the truth about himself and others. How's that's burning everyone to the ground? Do you think he should have kept omertà? Good message that one!

Crikey, you guys are.... ummm.... ridiculous?

 

[Dear Wiggo]

And rightly so. He is the only one with a "no compromise" attitude.

Except when he doped.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

I wouldn't say it's a stupid question. I say it's a bit childish, as we all know it is impossible to prove someone was clean. The best we can get is "we cannot prove he doped".

It all comes down to one's opinion, I'm afraid.

Huh? Who said anything about proving someone is clean? What a stupid notion.

Just give me your opinion - has anyone else, ever, won the TdF clean?

 

[red_flanders]

We knew telecom were doping, CSC doping, in-fact Postal's doping programme was comical and nowhere near as sophisticated as some of the other teams.

I'm sorry, but...WHAT???

 

[D-Queued]

You're a dumbo. What's this "doped to the extreme" buisness? How does one dope regularly compared to "extreme" doping? Sounds to me like you're embellishing the story for effect.

Landis didn't burn anything down. He just told the truth about himself and others. How's that's burning everyone to the ground? Do you think he should have kept omertà? Good message that one!

Crikey, you guys are.... ummm.... ridiculous?

Never said I was a rocket scientist. And who are you guys? Thought you were criticizing me.

Now, as an aside, you suggest that I am embellishing something? Have you even read one of Digger's posts?

For us non-rocket scientists, let's lay this out:

1. Floyd dopes
2. Floyd dopes some more
3. Floyd joins Postal/Disco
4. Floyd gets on a real doping program
5. Floyd switches to Phonak
6. Floyd keeps doping, but sophistication goes all to hell. Doping has to be managed by himself and/or by relying upon his entourage (i.e. would someone please follow the Allan Lim connection. And, what about Arnie Baker M -f'in- D's role in all of this??)
7. Floyd 'rides' to the Tour (really great way to avoid the OOC tests pre-tour since nobody knows 'whereabouts' he actually might be)
8. Floyd dopes for Stage 17 for the big comeback, while riding a Harley according to expert observers
9. Floyd gets, err, caught red-handed
10. Floyd launches Wacki-pedia defense, FFFraud campaign and Play By the Rulez political lobbying to eliminate USADA budget
11. LNDD is hacked
12. Arnie Baker Medical - f'in - Doctor puts together dumbest PowerPoint ever, including some apparently falsified stuff from the LNDD hack
13. Floyd goes to arbitration
14. NONE of the arguments from Wacki-Defense / Arnie Baker MD is actually submitted at arbitration suggesting, rather strongly, that it was all smokescreen
15. Will gets Greg's phone number from Floyd sitting right beside him and makes intimidation phone call
16. Arbitration confirms what EVERYONE knew. Floyd doped.

Some time later, the now broke and recluse, Floyd realizes that Qui Tam might generate even more money that he would have made as a cyclist.

Floyd comes (partially) clean. We find out he was good friends with Edgar and a lot of other chemicals.

And, finally, Digger blames Greg.

Dave.

 

[thehog]

That's a dumb post. Because he didn't get caught. The entire field was banging it on EPO and blood bags (bar the French who sucked on cortisone). Landis was receiving bags of blood hidden in a newspaper. It was about as sophisticated as a bar room brawl.

The whole period was awash with doping. You know that. He did what he did but unlike the Garmin "good doper" admissions he told it all in balls and all.

There's 5000 words in one Kimmidge interview which opened people's eyes that this is not just a bunch of cyclists doping. It's laden from the UCI all the way down.

And like I've said in the past. Landis's arb hearing exposed a lot weaknesses in the anti-doping process. A lot of procedures were tightened after those efforts.

As for LeMond, well his testimony was struck off as lies. Couldn't help himself, he was dizzy for Lance and got in the way of somebody else defending themselves and decided to use them as collateral damage.

And last time I checked Armstrong's undoing was by Landis. Not LeMond or anyone else.

 

[D-Queued]

That's a dumb post. Because he didn't get caught. The entire field was banging it on EPO and blood bags (bar the French who sucked on cortisone). Landis was receiving bags of blood hidden in a newspaper. It was about as sophisticated as a bar room brawl.

The whole period was awash with doping. You know that. He did what he did but unlike the Garmin "good doper" admissions he told it all in balls and all.

There's 5000 words in one Kimmidge interview which opened people's eyes that this is not just a bunch of cyclists doping. It's laden from the UCI all the way down.

And like I've said in the past. Landis's arb hearing exposed a lot weaknesses in the anti-doping process. A lot of procedures were tightened after those efforts.

As for LeMond, well his testimony was struck off as lies. Couldn't help himself, he was dizzy for Lance and got in the way of somebody else defending themselves and decided to use them as collateral damage.

And last time I checked Armstrong's undoing was by Landis. Not LeMond or anyone else.

1. Yes, Landis' case exposed a lot of weaknesses. We now have the Landis rule, and the ADA's are allowed to make public statements in response to PR campaigns.

Of course, that doesn't stop folks like Digger from continuing to wage their BS hate campaigns.

2. LeMond's testimony was struck off as lies? Sorry, but that goes way beyond overstatement and represents a lie. Link please. With specific legal findings, and not yours or Diggers opinions.

3. Armstrong was hoist by his own petard.

Dave.

 

[MarkvW]

Hard for me to see how Greg Lemond could damage the sport of cycling. The sport is already in the deepest part of the dumpster. Nothing a decades-old former champion could say would make it any worse--especially when you have greater champions (Merckx, Hinault) cheerleading the sport, and leading teams led by the likes of Riis and Vinokourov. Floyd, the person Digger digs for, said as much in the recent CN interview.

 

[thehog]

1. Yes, Landis' case exposed a lot of weaknesses. We now have the Landis rule, and the ADA's are allowed to make public statements in response to PR campaigns.

Of course, that doesn't stop folks like Digger from continuing to wage their BS hate campaigns.

2. LeMond's testimony was struck off as lies? Sorry, but that goes way beyond overstatement and represents a lie. Link please. With specific legal findings, and not yours or Diggers opinions.

3. Armstrong was hoist by his own ***.

Dave.

Digger is not waging a campaign. He just calls out dopers. Plain and simple. If you're a Greg fan you might get upset. But it's hardly a campaign against one person.

LeMond, refused to answer questions at the USADA hearing. He wouldn't talk. And the panel didn't have the powers to compel him to talk. All that LeMond said was that Landis admitted to him on the phone, which the panel concluded as not true. A lie in other words If Greg was up front and honest I'm sure he wouldn't have had a problem answering on cross, yes?

Armstrong was meeting presidents and had Nike in his pocket. He was literally king of the world. Until May 2010. No one else managed to even put a dent in Armstrong until Landis.

But we know all of this... and don't be too shocked by doping. Cyclists are still doing it you know?

 

[blackcat]

You Have to take into account that some people were actually dying at the time...

this was actually apocryphal.

the dutch cyclists dying cos of EPO was retrofitted to serve a purpose

 

[Berzin]

Enough with the name-calling. For the umpteenth time, play the ball not the man.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Huh? Who said anything about proving someone is clean? What a stupid notion.

Just give me your opinion - has anyone else, ever, won the TdF clean?

Proving someone is clean is stupid but saying someone won the Tour clean is not ? You'll have to explain this one to me...

My opinion is, since I can't prove anyone is clean, I can't say for sure that anyone won the Tour clean. And I haven't. If you need anything else regarding my opinion, read this : https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

 

[DirtyWorks]

this was actually apocryphal.

the dutch cyclists dying cos of EPO was retrofitted to serve a purpose

Disagree. We know there were unexplained deaths of elite amateurs due to heart failure. We know sports federations already were fully aware of EPO within months of introduction to Europe.

We know, for sure, Verbruggen had no problem with doping and was denying there was anything wrong. Revive one of the early EPO threads if you feel strongly.

Unfortunately, this predates the Internet, so it's tough to find. But, I was an enthusiastic velonews subscriber at the time and remember the mentions.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Proving someone is clean is stupid but saying someone won the Tour clean is not ? You'll have to explain this one to me...

My opinion is, since I can't prove anyone is clean, I can't say for sure that anyone won the Tour clean. And I haven't. If you need anything else regarding my opinion, read this : https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

Do you forum much? Coz I am simply replying to your assertion that "you can't prove someone is clean". Well duh.

You think LeMond doped then?

Coz. You know. Mention LeMond may have doped and a whole bunch of people get all kinds of uppity.

 

[@NL_LeMondFans]

Lemond has become omerta now, like everyone else who wants to be part of pro cycling.

Obviously this is hard to grasp for people who still view him as some sort of hero because they hate Lance.

So there's hero or omerta and nothing in between, then ?

"Only Sith deal in absolutes".

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Proving someone is clean is stupid but saying someone won the Tour clean is not ? You'll have to explain this one to me...

My opinion is, since I can't prove anyone is clean, I can't say for sure that anyone won the Tour clean. And I haven't. If you need anything else regarding my opinion, read this : https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

Do you forum much? Coz I am simply replying to your assertion that "you can't prove someone is clean". Well duh. It's a stupd notion to think I am asking you to "prove someone is clean". All I asked is - is Greg the only rider to win the Tour clean? Not sure how I can dumb that down for you...

I can't say for sure that anyone won the Tour clean.

You think LeMond doped then?

Coz. You know. Mention LeMond may have doped and a whole bunch of people get all kinds of uppity.

Or are you one of those "I don't know so I won't / can't say" people?

 

[D-Queued]

Digger is not waging a campaign. He just calls out dopers. Plain and simple. If you're a Greg fan you might get upset. But it's hardly a campaign against one person.

LeMond, refused to answer questions at the USADA hearing. He wouldn't talk. And the panel didn't have the powers to compel him to talk. All that LeMond said was that Landis admitted to him on the phone, which the panel concluded as not true. A lie in other words If Greg was up front and honest I'm sure he wouldn't have had a problem answering on cross, yes?

Armstrong was meeting presidents and had Nike in his pocket. He was literally king of the world. Until May 2010. No one else managed to even put a dent in Armstrong until Landis.

But we know all of this... and don't be too shocked by doping. Cyclists are still doing it you know?

Many times in the past you have offered thoughts that I felt were insightful on legal matters.

Not sure where you are going with this one, though.

As you may recall from your previous insights, there is a gap between direct and indirect evidence. Moreover, there is an even wider gap between test results and hearsay.

However, I asked for a link. As you didn't provide one, allow me.

Even though LeMond may not have been able to provide direct evidence, Floyd's own actions - or at least his indirect action and the direct actions of his manager - likely damaged his case more than anything LeMond could have possibly provided.

ESPN: LeMond testimony hurts Landis' case -- outside of court

It remains to be seen whether three-time Tour de France victor Greg LeMond's sensational testimony against accused 2006 Tour winner Landis will have any significant impact on a fight that most likely will pivot on deep science, not the deep and twisted roots of a three-way feud between the only U.S. riders to win cycling's most famous event.

The only sure bet is that Landis' battle to win over public opinion took a massive hit Thursday after his business manager, former teammate and close friend Will Geoghegan was revealed to have made a legally ill-advised and personally vicious phone call to LeMond on the eve of LeMond's appearance at Landis' arbitration hearing.

...

One can only imagine how donors to the Floyd Fairness Fund felt when they learned about what LeMond said next.

The courtroom was silent and still, except for Landis lawyer Maurice Suh, who whirled toward Geoghegan at the first mention of the phone call and began whispering to him intensely. Geoghegan, a former rider who first befriended Landis when Landis was a teenager, sat with his head bowed and his exposed neck flushed crimson in the row of seats behind the defense table.

...

If Digger is calling out dopers, then why does Floyd get a pass? And, why the focus on LeMond. All these pictures of Greg are, ultimately, ridiculous.

To hell with the doping. That one act alone was repulsive, and revealed the true character of Floyd's team.

Here is another link for you:

Fans of Floyd deserved more than this

If I dug into my pocket to give to the Floyd Fairness Fund, I'd be firing off a letter asking for a refund right about now. Over the past few months, Landis raised a reported $600,000 by painting himself as the underdog. Now we learn that, until Thursday, Landis had a manager who thought of himself as a member of the underworld.

...

So, if you, Digger, or anyone else wants me to hate LeMond and love Floyd, I have to question your sanity and motives. FFF = Flandis's (manager) F*cked (his) Fans.

I realize Floyd has since approached LeMond, and I am cheering Floyd on in his Qui Tam. But, that doesn't make me blind nor do I have the blessing of Alzheimers when it comes to the painful memories of how Floyd chose to conduct himself regarding his doping positive.

He burned a lot of people before he came partway clean.

If there is a choice between Floyd having some money, however, or Armstrong keeping all of his ill-got gains, it is an easy one to make.

This has, however, been one sorry saga.

Oh, look, here is a picture of Greg LeMond, smiling, with Lance Armstrong.

If one is to believe all the Here-is-a-picture-that-proves-we-should-hate-lemond nonsense above, then this picture must prove that all this Greg versus Lance stuff is just a bunch of fiction...

Dave.

 

[blackcat]

Proving someone is clean is stupid but saying someone won the Tour clean is not ? You'll have to explain this one to me...

My opinion is, since I can't prove anyone is clean, I can't say for sure that anyone won the Tour clean. And I haven't. If you need anything else regarding my opinion, read this : https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

Dear Wiggo has made implicit differentiation between proof and opinion.

most folks here conflate opinion and truth

like the aphorism from democrat senator daniel patrick moynihan everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but they are not entitled to their own facts.

also relevant to this board, Keynes and Churchill have been attribute,

when facts change, i change my mind, what do you do sir?

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/keynes-didnt-say-when-the-facts-change-i-change-my-mind-2011-9

 

[Digger]

Many times in the past you have offered thoughts that I felt were insightful on legal matters.

Not sure where you are going with this one, though.

As you may recall from your previous insights, there is a gap between direct and indirect evidence. Moreover, there is an even wider gap between test results and hearsay.

However, I asked for a link. As you didn't provide one, allow me.

Even though LeMond may not have been able to provide direct evidence, Floyd's own actions - or at least his indirect action and the direct actions of his manager - likely damaged his case more than anything LeMond could have possibly provided.

ESPN: LeMond testimony hurts Landis' case -- outside of court



If Digger is calling out dopers, then why does Floyd get a pass? And, why the focus on LeMond. All these pictures of Greg are, ultimately, ridiculous.

To hell with the doping. That one act alone was repulsive, and revealed the true character of Floyd's team.

Here is another link for you:

Fans of Floyd deserved more than this



So, if you, Digger, or anyone else wants me to hate LeMond and love Floyd, I have to question your sanity and motives. FFF = Flandis's (manager) F*cked (his) Fans.

I realize Floyd has since approached LeMond, and I am cheering Floyd on in his Qui Tam. But, that doesn't make me blind nor do I have the blessing of Alzheimers when it comes to the painful memories of how Floyd chose to conduct himself regarding his doping positive.

He burned a lot of people before he came partway clean.

If there is a choice between Floyd having some money, however, or Armstrong keeping all of his ill-got gains, it is an easy one to make.

This has, however, been one sorry saga.

Oh, look, here is a picture of Greg LeMond, smiling, with Lance Armstrong.

If one is to believe all the Here-is-a-picture-that-proves-we-should-hate-lemond nonsense above, then this picture must prove that all this Greg versus Lance stuff is just a bunch of fiction...

Dave.

Greg's version of the phone call with Floyd, not the Will phone call, was established by Feds to not have happened - class guy.