LeMond III

[hrotha]

That's my point, the two aren't incompatible. I might laud Pantani. I'm also antidoping.

 

[sniper]

Re:

That's my point, the two aren't incompatible. I might laud Pantani. I'm also antidoping.

but you're not a public figure made out to be part of the peloton's antidoping movement.
for those guys who are, it's warranted to signal when they behave just like regular keepers of omerta,
suggesting they're not so antidoping after all.

If you say it's a boring argument, I agree, but you'll have to take that up with the people who tirelessly defend Lemond as (one of) the only clean GT winner(s) in the modern era.

 

[gillan1969]

Re: Re:

That's my point, the two aren't incompatible. I might laud Pantani. I'm also antidoping.

but you're not a public figure made out to be part of the peloton's antidoping movement.
for those guys who are, it's warranted to signal when they behave just like regular keepers of omerta,
suggesting they're not so antidoping after all.

If you say it's a boring argument, I agree, but you'll have to take that up with the people who tirelessly defend Lemond as (one of) the only clean GT winner(s) in the modern era.

there is less tireless defending of Lemond as there is tireless promotion of Lemond as being at the forefront of anti-doping..usually so that he can then be shot down from that position by the same people

there is something consistent about lemond (and not just his results )...that is that his position tends to correlate with what is best for his pockets..so he had no incentive to speak out when Kimmage wrote his book but he did when Armstrong came along...and he still does....

his pockets seem to dictate what he says and does rather than any history of doping himself, or any particular stance on doping at a more fundamental level.....

 

[hrotha]

Re: Re:

That's my point, the two aren't incompatible. I might laud Pantani. I'm also antidoping.

but you're not a public figure made out to be part of the peloton's antidoping movement.
for those guys who are, it's warranted to signal when they behave just like regular keepers of omerta,
suggesting they're not so antidoping after all.

If you say it's a boring argument, I agree, but you'll have to take that up with the people who tirelessly defend Lemond as (one of) the only clean GT winner(s) in the modern era.

In effect, aren't you accusing LeMond of being a hypocrite (for attacking LA at the same time he lauds other dopers), while asking him to take a more hypocritical public stance (ostracizing all dopers even if he, like me, doesn't feel it's necessary or desirable)?

If I disagree with the argument, I don't need to take it up with the people who aren't using it. LeMond's status as clean or dirty is irrelevant here.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

there is less tireless defending of Lemond as there is tireless promotion of Lemond as being at the forefront of anti-doping..usually so that he can then be shot down from that position by the same people

there is something consistent about lemond (and not just his results )...that is that his position tends to correlate with what is best for his pockets..so he had no incentive to speak out when Kimmage wrote his book but he did when Armstrong came along...and he still does....

his pockets seem to dictate what he says and does rather than any history of doping himself, or any particular stance on doping at a more fundamental level.....

fair points, i would agree with that depiction.

a wider point would be that there's just nothing there in that character description that warrants the assumption that Lemond, unlike the vast majority of GT winners, somehow didn't succumb to the temptations of doping.

 

[sniper]

Re: Re:

...
In effect, aren't you accusing LeMond of being a hypocrite (for attacking LA at the same time he lauds other dopers)

sure, though here in this forum I personally have hardly if ever taken recourse to this line of argumentation. There is (much) more interesting and compelling stuff to discuss in the context of Lemond than his public statements on former cyclists.

while asking him to take a more hypocritical public stance (ostracizing all dopers even if he, like me, doesn't feel it's necessary or desirable)?

I'd never ask this of him. On the contrary.
I think people are just asking for consistency, I guess, i.e. what you say in the first line of your post.
Again, it's not the argument I'm personally interested in making. But I can see why others point it out.

If I disagree with the argument, I don't need to take it up with the people who aren't using it. LeMond's status as clean or dirty is irrelevant here.

I see what you mean, and you're right, they're in principle two different questions (Lemond's cleanliness as a rider vs. Lemond's belonging to the current crop of antidoping crusaders) and indeed i was guilty of mixing them up in my previous responses.

 

[sniper]

Re:

...
Does the name Castoings ring a bell for you?

yes he does.
A Dutch doc who accused Lemond of EPO in a 1999 blog entry.
I posted about him here:
viewtopic.php?p=1896797#p1896797

Interestingly, I searched for him and Lemond yesterday using google, and it gave me *zero* results. Even the link I posted in that earlier post on Castoings (http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1401/ad/integration/nmc/frameset/varia/kobala_article.dhtml?artid=rd003372) doesn't seem to exist anymore.
All I get is google telling me about new google protection laws that allow individuals to have their name removed from certain google searches.
So suddenly, there is zero trace on the internet of Castoings accusing Lemond of EPO.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Re: Re:

...
Does the name Castoings ring a bell for you?

yes he does.
A Dutch doc who accused Lemond of EPO in a 1999 blog entry.
I posted about him here:
viewtopic.php?p=1896797#p1896797

Interestingly, I searched for him and Lemond yesterday using google, and it gave me *zero* results. Even the link I posted in that earlier post on Castoings (http://www.ad.nl/ad/nl/1401/ad/integration/nmc/frameset/varia/kobala_article.dhtml?artid=rd003372) doesn't seem to exist anymore.
All I get is google telling me about new google protection laws that allow individuals to have their name removed from certain google searches.
So suddenly, there is zero trace on the internet of Castoings accusing Lemond of EPO.

Another conspiracy.....you can talk about till the cows come home (where are the damn cows anyway)

 

[sniper]

You see conspiracies left right and center.
Why this 'conspiracy-only' view of things?

 

[86TDFWinner]

Re:

I don't know if greg doped - what I do know, and I said it to kimmage in 2012, is that he said f*** all when Rough Ride came out. And him lauding pantani is laughable...so many instances to mention. And it's a good point about his business - you'd almost think lance ruined his business and he was on the breadline - the guy was a multi millionaire. And is even more rich now due to that property settlement.

Iirc, I don't believe Greg got much(if at all) from that property settlement thing. I believe the company filed for bankruptcy, leaving all investors( including Greg) on the lerch for millions owed.

I do think however, that Greg stuck it to Jokely(Oakley) this time around & probably asked them for the moon with the new deal he got from them & rightfully so. I continue to lol at Jokely & how much the inevitably had to pay out to Greg to "right the wrong" so to speak, for backing imbecile Wonderboy. I also lol at how funny it is to know that Stephanie Mcillvane was exposed as a lying, narcissistic, scumbag & she did all that for nothing.

 

[Mr.38%]

BBC 5 live Sport ‏@5liveSport 16 Std.Vor 16 Stunden
Froome would be first rider in 21 years (if you forget about Armstrong) to retain his title

Can he do it?
#TDF2016


Michael Rasmussen ‏@MRasmussen1974 6 Std.Vor 6 Stunden
Michael Rasmussen hat BBC 5 live Sport retweetet
And the 1st in more than 50 years if you also forget Big Mig,Lemond,Hinault,Merckx and Coppi! #TDF2016 #ekstrabladet

 

[thehog]

Had a chuckle when I read this headline today... :surprised:

'Immediately destroy all recordings': Taylor Swift's attorney threatened Kanye West with legal action over 'criminal' taping of phone conversation

Taylor, 26, accused Kanye and Kim of 'character assassination' after the reality star leaked the recording on Snapchat

Attorney for Bad Blood singer had warned the rapper in February that secretly taping a phone call is a criminal offense in California

The lawyer's letter demanded all recordings made of the conversation between Taylor and Kanye about the song Famous be destroyed

Taylor tweeted Monday that the footage showed she never signed off on the final song and its lyric 'I made that b***h famous'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-3695989/Taylor-Swift-s-attorney-DID-threatened-Kanye-West-legal-action-criminal-taping-phone-conversation.html#ixzz4EmXuTBIK

While the Keeping Up With The Kardashians star was clearly trying to defend her husband in the increasingly bitter feud, her actions may land him in very hot water.

The telephone call was, the website says, recorded as part of footage being shot of Kanye working in a LA-area studio.

That means Taylor, 26, could now file a lawsuit against him and Kim for breaking the law.


The attorney's letter had stated: 'Demand is hereby made that you immediately destroy all such recordings, provide us of assurance that this has been done, and also assurance that these recordings have not been previously disseminated.'

 

[sniper]

Lol, nice spot.

As they say in Texas: fool me once, shame on you.
Or in Manchester: you don't cheat on monday but not on tuesday.

 

[thehog]

Re:

Lol, nice spot.

As they say in Texas: fool me once, shame on you.
Or in Manchester: you don't cheat on monday but not on tuesday.

He knew, LeMond is as cool as Kayne

 

[blackcat]

Re: Re:

Lol, nice spot.

As they say in Texas: fool me once, shame on you.
Or in Manchester: you don't cheat on monday but not on tuesday.

He knew, LeMond is as cool as Kayne

Ricky Riccio >Kayne Kardashian

 

[DanielSong39]

Ha! Of course LeMond doped. Otherwise he would've been shot off the back of the peloton.

What's clear, however, is that he didn't initially have access to the best dope (EPO) in the early 90's and that put him at a severe competitive disadvantage.

 

[popular jams]

If there was evidence of LeMond doping, it would have been ferreted out when Armstrong engaged in his campaign to discredit LeMond. Iromically, Armstrong's tactics only strengthen the case that LeMond rode clean.

Armstrong was offering down-and-out ex-pros and associates six figures to say that they saw LeMond in the same town as a PED. The notion was so incredible that he had no takers.

But maybe LeMond doped in secret in a sport where it was openly discussed. Who knows what Kathy was putting in those foil-wrapped sandwiches!

 

[sniper]

there is evidence of Lemond doping.
there is no evidence of those six figures.
ironic is the word.

 

[patricknd]

Re:

there is evidence of Lemond doping.
there is no evidence of those six figures.
ironic is the word.

***!!! I've seen lots of posts here about the 6 figures, it must be true !!!

 

[popular jams]

Re:

there is evidence of Lemond doping.
there is no evidence of those six figures.
ironic is the word.

Then it must be so, snipey. It must be so.

 

[perico]

LeMond calls out Team Sky... "Marginal gains load of bollocks"

In an interview in L’Equipe, three-time winner Greg LeMond said there is “nothing worse than doubt.” After raising doubts about motors in the peloton, he also had a go at Sky, saying this: “Froome turns the legs so fast that it’s contrary to the laws of physiology. What annoys me is to hear certain trainers say it’s all science fiction, which is disinformation. Others make us believe that they are ahead in science. These famous marginal gains of Team Sky? What a load of bollocks. There are no new training methods; it’s false. In this area, miracles don’t exist.”
Read more at http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/tour-notebook-reading-olegs-mind-lemonds-sky-doubts_415091#U0vQVlBvAbJRCKo2.99

http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/tour-notebook-reading-olegs-mind-lemonds-sky-doubts_415091

 

[adamfo]

LeMond calls out Team Sky... "Marginal gains load of bollocks"

In an interview in L’Equipe, three-time winner Greg LeMond said there is “nothing worse than doubt.” After raising doubts about motors in the peloton, he also had a go at Sky, saying this: “Froome turns the legs so fast that it’s contrary to the laws of physiology. What annoys me is to hear certain trainers say it’s all science fiction, which is disinformation. Others make us believe that they are ahead in science. These famous marginal gains of Team Sky? What a load of bollocks. There are no new training methods; it’s false. In this area, miracles don’t exist.”
Read more at http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/tour-notebook-reading-olegs-mind-lemonds-sky-doubts_415091#U0vQVlBvAbJRCKo2.99

http://velonews.competitor.com/2016/07/tour-de-france/tour-notebook-reading-olegs-mind-lemonds-sky-doubts_415091

That sounds like a bit of a misquote. Raising doubts, in the sense there is no longer the possibility of mechanical doping in the tour. He said on Eurosport "it's unthinkable now" and has in the past, and indeed recently, said he believes Froome rides clean

 

[DamianoMachiavelli]

LOL. Armstrong on the eve of winning three, so LeMond calls him out. Froome on the eve of winning three, so LeMond calls him out. That b1tch just doesn't like anyone stealing his spotlight--at least not English speakers who talk to the Engish speaking press; French, Spanish, and Belgians are a-okay, no matter how much they doped.

 

[veganrob]

Uhhh, I don't think so.

 

[thehog]

LOL. Armstrong on the eve of winning three, so LeMond calls him out. Froome on the eve of winning three, so LeMond calls him out. That b1tch just doesn't like anyone stealing his spotlight--at least not English speakers who talk to the Engish speaking press; French, Spanish, and Belgians are a-okay, no matter how much they doped.

I actually thought the same thing, Froome's absurd spinning attacks were up for show in 2013 and LeMond said he was clean. As soon as Dawg gets near the 3-time threshold the LeMond reality distortion field kicks in. Let this be a lesson to any young aspiring Anglo Tour riders - don't win more than two Tours :lol: