LeMond II

[StyrbjornSterki]

Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

I've been following this thread for 165 pages and I have yet to see a single "legitimate" question. All they've done is cast ignorant aspersions and throw fecal matter against a wall in the vain hope that something sticks.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

Please stop asking me to stop.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re: Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

I've been following this thread for 165 pages and I have yet to see a single "legitimate" question. All they've done is cast ignorant aspersions and throw fecal matter against a wall in the vain hope that something sticks.

Bingo!! Thank you.

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

Not impressed with LeMond taking the line that the sport is now cleanER and so talking to the likes of Vino and today Mick Rogers is all well and good. It aint.

The guy is rich, not billionaire rich, but he dont need to do this to earn a crust!

It really points to LeMond being only anti Armstrong. All those dopers and doping enablers that raced against Armstrong are still there....bar 1 or 2..

Have to agree with you here Benotti

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

I've been following this thread for 165 pages and I have yet to see a single "legitimate" question. All they've done is cast ignorant aspersions and throw fecal matter against a wall in the vain hope that something sticks.

i read about 9 or 10 pages of this thread, and thanks to that i ended up thinking there's actually a chance Lemond might have been clean.
before that i was a 100% sure he's a doper.
so yeah, certain things in this thread stick.
but those "why don't you shut up and stop digging, you nasty Lance fan" messages are just ...
if anybody is certain lemond was clean, i don't understand why s/he would want to shut down discussion.

 

[Rackham]

My first post here, in this LeMond thread just to mention a fact I believe has been overlooked (I didn't read all 165 pages, but in the pages I read I haven't seen anyone address the issue I'm about to raise): Greg LeMond raced for La Vie Claire cycling team in the 1980's, i.e. a team created by none other than Bernard Tapie, aka, a convicted criminal who actually served prison time after he cheated with his Olympique de Marseille football club in 1993 (match fixing). He was sentenced to two years in prison, of which he served six months.

So my point here is simple: other riders are often & in most cases rightly deemed guilty by association with known criminals & some dubious people (Michele Ferrari was Armstrong's own obvious smoking gun), ergo Greg Lemond raced for a team created by a convicted cheat & criminal, who I should believe ran a 'clean' cycling team in the 80's when most were on the juice? Nah, I'm not anywhere near naive enough to believe such an implausible scenario.

I don't need hard evidence to make an analytical assessment of 'hired by Bernard Tapie = highly suspicious'.

Here's Jean-Jacques EYDELIE's (footballer) take on organized doping in Bernard Tapie's OM football club in the early 90's: http://www.oldschoolpanini.com/2011/11/quand-jean-jacques-eydelie-balance.html

"Sur le dopage dont vous l’accusiez ?
« Le dopage était organisé à l’OM. Depuis Tony Cascarino a confirmé mes propos... Chris Waddle aussi »."

So Bernard Tapie doped his footballers & fixed a match, yet ran a clean cycling team several years earlier? I cannot believe that, i.e. it's a step too far into suspension of disbelief.

 

[sniper]

Re:

My first post here, in this LeMond thread just to mention a fact I believe has been overlooked (I didn't read all 165 pages, but in the pages I read I haven't seen anyone address the issue I'm about to raise): Greg LeMond raced for La Vie Claire cycling team in the 1980's, i.e. a team created by none other than Bernard Tapie, aka, a convicted criminal who actually served prison time after he cheated with his Olympique de Marseille football club in 1993 (match fixing). He was sentenced to two years in prison, of which he served six months.

So my point here is simple: other riders are often & in most cases rightly deemed guilty by association with known criminals & some dubious people (Michele Ferrari was Armstrong's own obvious smoking gun), ergo Greg Lemond raced for a team created by a convicted cheat & criminal, who I should believe ran a 'clean' cycling team in the 80's when most were on the juice? Nah, I'm not anywhere near naive enough to believe such an implausible scenario.

I don't need hard evidence to make an analytical assessment of 'hired by Bernard Tapie = highly suspicious'.

Here's Jean-Jacques EYDELIE's (footballer) take on organized doping in Bernard Tapie's OM football club in the early 90's: http://www.oldschoolpanini.com/2011/11/quand-jean-jacques-eydelie-balance.html

"Sur le dopage dont vous l’accusiez ?
« Le dopage était organisé à l’OM. Depuis Tony Cascarino a confirmé mes propos... Chris Waddle aussi »."

So Bernard Tapie doped his footballers & fixed a match, yet ran a clean cycling team several years earlier? I cannot believe that, i.e. it's a step too far into suspension of disbelief.

i'll respond, if only to annoy 86tdfwinner

good post, interesting point about Tapie, and you're probably right about La Vie Claire.
but...
i don't think the average pro-Lemond poster is denying Lemond rode for very dirty teams including La Vie Claire.
Other Lemond teams (specifically ADR and PDM) were dirty as hell (and proven to be so through a variety of doping busts, scandals and positives) and had docs on the pay roll who later turned out to be plain doping docs (e.g. Vanmol, Peter Jansen).

The #1 pro-Lemond argument seems to be that if he'd been doping, somebody would have outed him by now, especially in light of the fact that Lance badly wanted him exposed.
That certainly seems a fair argument, although obviously it's not conclusive in any sense.
E.g. Indurain has never been outed either, yet nobody doubts he's a doper. (Banesto got outed, yes, but Indurain personally, no, afaik)
And there have in fact been rumors circulating in the peloton about Lemond using EPO for his kidney treatment, though that probably shouldn't count as a direct accusation (but still that's more than any accusation I've ever heard being levelled at Indurain).

In my opinion, the strongest argument in favor of Lemond is the fact that Vanmol vouched for his cleanliness in a 2006 interview. Vanmol by then had already admitted to (part of) his own doping past and generally stated that doping in the 80s was widespread, so he had no particular reason to say that about Lemond if he didn't really believe it.
Maybe somebody in the know can tell me if there've been other reliable sources (i.e. people with no clear benefit from selling clean cycling fairy tales) vouching for Lemond?

 

[red_flanders]

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Re: Re:

My biology specific experience is limited, but anyone care to comment on the scar vs the location of kidneys in regards to the gunshot wound damaging the kidneys?

I have near abouts its twin. That's the standard incision site for a laparotomy. It makes for such a large opening, essentially the entire abdominal cavity is accessible, including the kidney(s). In Lemond's case, they didn't operate expressly to repair a kidney, and probably would not have known with any certainty that a kidney was involved until they were inside. They went in to survey the extent of the damage, make all possible repairs and recover some of the buckshot.

Cheers.

 

[the delgados]

Re: Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

I've been following this thread for 165 pages and I have yet to see a single "legitimate" question. All they've done is cast ignorant aspersions and throw fecal matter against a wall in the vain hope that something sticks.

I don't think anyone is throwing fecal matter against a wall in the hope that it sticks. The reasoning behind casting aspersions is no different than those cast toward most modern day rider--a lot of whom have either been caught or directly implicated. Like I've said a million times before to 86TDFWinner, I don't know if Lemond ever used PED's during his long and illustrious career.
The only issue I take with Lemond backers is the blind faith that he never doped. I've read several criticisms of David Millar for claiming to know that Sky is clean. They question how in the hell could Millar know, given that he never rode with Sky. Yet these were the same people who trot out the "Kimmage knows Lemond was clean," despite the fact Kimmage never rode on the same team, nor were they buddies.
If Lemond never took a single PED during his career, I would put him at the top of best athletes ever. Then again, he is one of the best athletes ever, regardless.
P.s. 86 TDF: My apologies. Far be it for me to tell someone what to do

 

[Tonton]

Re: LeMond

As stated before, the Wonderboy clan, with all the inside info that come with working on the...inside, they would have made any doping on his part public. To me that's the biggest thing. How he got smacked at the '92 Luxembourg ITT would hint that he didn't do EPO. Yes, he has been associated with some shady characters, Guimard, Nanard (Tapie), but in cycling who has not? They're everywhere.

I'm a fan of his. However, and like many, it's the character side that I don't like as much. YouTube doesn't do justice to the World's '82. I watched it live, vintage news reports also blamed him for Boyer's demise. No one wanted to chase and bring Beppe to the line. He had lost to Maertens the previous year and had sworn he would win. But when Lemond saw an American threat to his "#1 American status", he couldn't stand it and brought Saronni back. Later, Lemond kept silent when BigMig, Riis, or Ulle won the TdF. He didn't say anything until he saw an American threat to his "#1 American status".

It's the perception of hypocrisy that drive people nuts about Lemond. And now that he's back in the bike business, gets a gig on TV, the exposure, he keeps quiet. "Hi Vino,how ya doin"? "Kiss on the cheek Bertie"?

Too bad TJVG isn't strong enough to pull a big escape a la Floyd: if it happened, I would want to see the video of Lemond watching his TV monitor. I bet he wouldn't be cheering .

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re: Re:

IF whoever this "expert" is who claims to know this, had even a shred of proof to back it up, don't you think he/she would've been all over the news about it? Surely someone with a vendetta against LeMond would've been to USADA/WADA/UCI with their hands in the air, waving said proof in their faces, and eventually bring him down.

Plus, Wonderboy offers up $350K to ANY rider with "proof" that LeMond doped, and no one bites?

as noted previously, dhaenens died of a carcrash in 1998, so he couldn't go anywhere.

perhaps you can address the message (as e.g. Merckx Index and Franklin have done) because you'll sound no better than the average lance fan if you just dismiss it as nonesense.

I've read what they said, and I'll say it AGAIN: IF he did dope, then where's the proof? He's been retired for 21 yrs, and nothing. Wonderboy offered up $350K to ANY one(rider/domestique/coach/mgr/etc) gthat saw Greg dope, that was crickets chirp too. The guy died in 98, that gave him how many years beforehand to drop the bomb on Greg, why wait to do it? he obviously didn't like Greg(whoever it is), so why wait to bust him if he did? seems odd to me.

AGAIN, You're playing the slot machine, hoping you hit the jackpot. Been beaten to death this topic, but evry so often, people bring it up, get educated, and then it goes away. Franklin said numerous times, that he doubts Greg doped, I do, and others do as well. take all that FWIW.

He was waiting on the 350k obviously.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

Not impressed with LeMond taking the line that the sport is now cleanER and so talking to the likes of Vino and today Mick Rogers is all well and good. It aint.

The guy is rich, not billionaire rich, but he dont need to do this to earn a crust!

It really points to LeMond being only anti Armstrong. All those dopers and doping enablers that raced against Armstrong are still there....bar 1 or 2..

This is true. I hate to agree with you on anything but that has been my reaction to his comments regarding the current peloton.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

86TDFWinner:
Please stop accusing those who have legitimate questions/and or random speculations about Lemond of being Armstrong supporters. It does nothing to bolster your case.

I've been following this thread for 165 pages and I have yet to see a single "legitimate" question. All they've done is cast ignorant aspersions and throw fecal matter against a wall in the vain hope that something sticks.

I don't think anyone is throwing fecal matter against a wall in the hope that it sticks. The reasoning behind casting aspersions is no different than those cast toward most modern day rider--a lot of whom have either been caught or directly implicated. Like I've said a million times before to 86TDFWinner, I don't know if Lemond ever used PED's during his long and illustrious career.
The only issue I take with Lemond backers is the blind faith that he never doped. I've read several criticisms of David Millar for claiming to know that Sky is clean. They question how in the hell could Millar know, given that he never rode with Sky. Yet these were the same people who trot out the "Kimmage knows Lemond was clean," despite the fact Kimmage never rode on the same team, nor were they buddies.
If Lemond never took a single PED during his career, I would put him at the top of best athletes ever. Then again, he is one of the best athletes ever, regardless.
P.s. 86 TDF: My apologies. Far be it for me to tell someone what to do

good post.
apologies? pulease, you were spot on.

 

[Semper Fidelis]

Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

But please god don't let anyone bring up speculation or a name of someone who said he was. Otherwise that is slinging some Sh!t against a wall to find out if it sticks according to the experts in all things Lemond.

It can be discussed and speculated upon in a civil manner but some don't want to and love to shout down anyone who try's that is clear to see.

Of course I would fall into the group who believe that Lemond did not dope. I finding it hard to believe with the last 40 years of history to fall back on but hey I still tend to believe he was doing it on bread and water.

Hey can someone answer this question for me. Greg got shot in the side and back. I can understand his operation but why is both his arms in cast's? He get shot and then went over the side of a cliff?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

Game.set.match

 

[joe_papp]

Re: Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

Game.set.match

Overheard b/w Eddie B. to Mike Fraysse (paraphrasing, but do your own heavy Polish-accent): "Greg was so naturally talented - a real diamond - that he didn't need to dope. Doping would've been wasted on him."

Just saying...it's not like Eddie B. - w/ Fraysse's backing as USCF VP at the time, iirc - was averse to blood-doping anyone on Team USA who wanted it (for LA games '84). So when Eddie B. says someone is so naturally gifted that doping them would be a fairly pointless exercise, I could believe that.

 

[perico]

Re: LeMond

As stated before, the Wonderboy clan, with all the inside info that come with working on the...inside, they would have made any doping on his part public. To me that's the biggest thing. How he got smacked at the '92 Luxembourg ITT would hint that he didn't do EPO. Yes, he has been associated with some shady characters, Guimard, Nanard (Tapie), but in cycling who has not? They're everywhere.

I'm a fan of his. However, and like many, it's the character side that I don't like as much. YouTube doesn't do justice to the World's '82. I watched it live, vintage news reports also blamed him for Boyer's demise. No one wanted to chase and bring Beppe to the line. He had lost to Maertens the previous year and had sworn he would win. But when Lemond saw an American threat to his "#1 American status", he couldn't stand it and brought Saronni back. Later, Lemond kept silent when BigMig, Riis, or Ulle won the TdF. He didn't say anything until he saw an American threat to his "#1 American status".

It's the perception of hypocrisy that drive people nuts about Lemond. And now that he's back in the bike business, gets a gig on TV, the exposure, he keeps quiet. "Hi Vino,how ya doin"? "Kiss on the cheek Bertie"?

Too bad TJVG isn't strong enough to pull a big escape a la Floyd: if it happened, I would want to see the video of Lemond watching his TV monitor. I bet he wouldn't be cheering .

That's not entirely accurate. LeMond was Floyd's biggest cheerleader in 2006 until the report came out. He was also a big supporter of Bobby Julich and even tipped him as a future Tour winner after 1998. He also guided Julich to Credit Agricole which had evolved from Team Z and run by Roger Legeay.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

But please god don't let anyone bring up speculation or a name of someone who said he was. Otherwise that is slinging some Sh!t against a wall to find out if it sticks according to the experts in all things Lemond.

It can be discussed and speculated upon in a civil manner but some don't want to and love to shout down anyone who try's that is clear to see.
...
Hey can someone answer this question for me. Greg got shot in the side and back. I can understand his operation but why is both his arms in cast's? He get shot and then went over the side of a cliff?

this.

and good question about the arms.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

Game.set.match

Overheard b/w Eddie B. to Mike Fraysse (paraphrasing, but do your own heavy Polish-accent): "Greg was so naturally talented - a real diamond - that he didn't need to dope. Doping would've been wasted on him."

Just saying...it's not like Eddie B. - w/ Fraysse's backing as USCF VP at the time, iirc - was averse to blood-doping anyone on Team USA who wanted it (for LA games '84). So when Eddie B. says someone is so naturally gifted that doping them would be a fairly pointless exercise, I could believe that.

eddie who?

you could find dozens of such quotes about guys like contador and ulrich and even lance i guess.

Do we really have much more on, say, Indurain than we have on Lemond?
Red Flanders spoke of riders/dopers vouching for Lemond. I posted Vanmol on the previous page. Would love to see other examples. If anybody could give me a name i can then search for it myself.

And do those who think lemond was clean also think Boardman was clean?
Boardman too has enjoyed a very clean rep, with e.g. Deliot vouching for his cleanliness.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Not impressed with LeMond taking the line that the sport is now cleanER and so talking to the likes of Vino and today Mick Rogers is all well and good. It aint.

The guy is rich, not billionaire rich, but he dont need to do this to earn a crust!

It really points to LeMond being only anti Armstrong. All those dopers and doping enablers that raced against Armstrong are still there....bar 1 or 2..

there's a good kimmage interview with Lemond out there (here: viewtopic.php?p=1190970#p1190970).
There's one point where Paul asks him if he'd ever seen doping happening around him e.g. from the French teammates at Peugeot he roomed with. Lemond does a Voigt-Yates immitation there saying he'd never seen anything.
When Kimmage asks him if he was at all aware of the doping culture, Greg says 'Yeah, but it didn’t matter to me.'
I have no reason to assume he's lying there, but it further supports the idea that he's never really been anti-doping.

It becomes more interesting when he says he's had "chronic kidney infections from the day I was born". Really? That's a pretty serious condition. If you have a kidney infection you need immediate medical attention. If it's chronic, well, good luck becoming a pro-cyclist.
on the other hand...the first amgen epo users were patients suffering from chronic kidney diseases.
http://www.spnefro.pt/nefro_portuguesa_mundo/PDFs/2007_hemodialise_artigo_04.pdf
Slowly starting to understand the Dhaenens rumor.
(btw. could it be that the Kimmage interview is the first time Lemond mentions the chronic kidney infections? I can't find it mentioned anywhere else.)

In the interview Lemond also claims he was "needle adverse". But then there's another anecdote where he draws a syringe of his own blood to have it tested somewhere in belgium. Not that needle adverse after all?
viewtopic.php?p=1191257#p1191257

 

[Dr.Guess]

Wow, great digging Sniper.
I am interested in your methods. Ill Pm you...

 

[neineinei]

Kidney infection could just mean bladder infections. http://www.medicinenet.com/kidney_infection/page3.htm

EPO was used for kidney failure. There is a long way from reacurring bladder infections to kidney failure.

 

[sniper]

Re:

Kidney infection could just mean bladder infections. http://www.medicinenet.com/kidney_infection/page3.htm

EPO was used for kidney failure. There is a long way from reacurring bladder infections to kidney failure.

i think you're reading that wrong.
a kidney infection is a 'urinary tract infection' (UCI).
a bladder infection is another type of 'urinary tract infection'.

Lower urinary tract infection involves the urethra, the bladder, and, in men, the prostate gland.
Upper urinary tract infection refers to infection of the kidneys.

of course, a lower UCI can develop into a upper UCI.
but they're not the same thing.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Re: Re:

The #1 argument that LeMond didn't dope is that there isn't a shred of credible evidence, let alone any proof that he did. No performance of his falls into the suspicious range, even the much attacked downhill TT in '89.

Several dopers and likely clean riders have gone out of their way to say he was clean, for no particular reason.

There is speculation. Nothing else.

Game.set.match

Overheard b/w Eddie B. to Mike Fraysse (paraphrasing, but do your own heavy Polish-accent): "Greg was so naturally talented - a real diamond - that he didn't need to dope. Doping would've been wasted on him."

Just saying...it's not like Eddie B. - w/ Fraysse's backing as USCF VP at the time, iirc - was averse to blood-doping anyone on Team USA who wanted it (for LA games '84). So when Eddie B. says someone is so naturally gifted that doping them would be a fairly pointless exercise, I could believe that.

eddie who?

you could find dozens of such quotes about guys like contador and ulrich and even lance i guess.

Do we really have much more on, say, Indurain than we have on Lemond?
Red Flanders spoke of riders/dopers vouching for Lemond. I posted Vanmol on the previous page. Would love to see other examples. If anybody could give me a name i can then search for it myself.

And do those who think lemond was clean also think Boardman was clean?
Boardman too has enjoyed a very clean rep, with e.g. Deliot vouching for his cleanliness.

Borysewicz....under him The US won a handful of medals at The LA olympics.



i wish you would add me when you next mention posters who help you find the light in this thread..thats if you make a list again...as you forget to ment.ion me the last time. you are welcome.