LEMOND the DOPER

[Oldman]

ps-pardon my ignorance and my profound apologies-but, what is trolling? I will do my level best to avoid it if it is anathema to everyone but what does the process entail?

Regurgitation of previous inflammatory, indigestiable and hyper-discussed matter. Tastes like bad chicken with a hangover. We've all had a taste of it and you shall too.

 

[Race Radio]

ps-pardon my ignorance and my profound apologies-but, what is trolling? I will do my level best to avoid it if it is anathema to everyone but what does the process entail?

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=6412

For a neophyte you seemed to have mastered the trolling skill quick.

3 pages and still no evidence of Lemond doping. let us know when you have a positive test, a doping doctors, the statements of former teammates etc.

 

[roadfreak44]

thx for the heads up I will attempt to be more cognizant of this in the future

 

[Jack Reacher]

I believe Armstrong is/was an epo and autologous blood transfusions doper .
No proof at all...;-)

 

[BroDeal]

How can you tell if it is Coolhand or the same idiot troll that we have around this forum?

I am joking, but this is the exact sort of idiocy that Coolhand uses on RBR to get people riled up so he can ban them.

We are now playing the guess the troll game. Is it another BPC or Jackhammer or a third of fourth sockpuppet for Deadlift?

 

[roadfreak44]

http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=6412

For a neophyte you seemed to have mastered the trolling skill quick.

3 pages and still no evidence of Lemond doping. let us know when you have a positive test, a doping doctors, the statements of former teammates etc.

true enough
but if you will remember my assertion was simply that by his own oft repeated logic he shoudnt have been able to beat fignon who is a confessed doper...

 

[BroDeal]

true enough
but if you will remember my assertion was simply that by his own oft repeated logic he shoudnt have been able to beat fignon who is a confessed doper...

We have seen this same argument with the same language before.

 

[roadfreak44]

sorry guys no need for paranoia as there is no deep cover here just a guy who read an article about fignon and his comments regarding lemond and put two and two together so posted here for the first time..
of course my logic is faultly...it is inferential versus deductive.. the same as lemonds

 

[Hugh Januss]

FYI- this si my first time posting. I broht the lemond thing up having read an interview with fignon recently in whiche saide doped...things clicked and i was under the imnpression that this is a forum where people discuss
(as in intelligently) viewpoints or opinions and not just offer oddly inappropriate insults but then these seem to come from "senior" members so perhaps they aremerely the manifestation ofhe onset of senile dementia?
as a new member am i supposed to ask each of these guys that dislike my viewpoint for permission to present a viewpoint before i do so?
If i have trampled any cherished ideals or lofty rules into the gorund with my declaration of opinion i apologize and perhaps i should be sent the properforms to fill out before offering an opinion so it can be " checked' for political correctness etc before i offer it?
stupid me i thought forums were for offering differing viewpoints.
obviously this is not one of "those kndve forums but perhaps a private club..
please enlighten !

First of all it's not your first post you made 2 posts months ago complaining about this and that about both the forum and the CN website (fair enough there). Second if you are Coolhand I owe you a big f---you for banning me from your dipstick forum just for my refusing to drink the Lance ball juice coolaid that you serve up over there.
As to your question about presenting a view point here (I think that is what you were asking, hard to tell through the bad spelling and poor syntax) of course that is your right. Just as it is my right to say that I believe your opinion is ignorant, and that you either lack the interest in learning or the reading and comprehension skills to do so, otherwise you would have seen that every "point" you bring up has been thoroughly covered in these threads over the past year to the point of redundancy.
But beyond that let me say, welcome to the forum, have a nice day.

 

[Race Radio]

true enough
but if you will remember my assertion was simply that by his own oft repeated logic he shoudnt have been able to beat fignon who is a confessed doper...

Do you understand the difference between EPO and Cortisone?

 

[luckyboy]

Do you understand the difference between EPO and Cortisone?

Wait.. Isn't cortisone much more effective as a doping agent?

Comical thread.

 

[Eyjafjallajokull]

I am joking, but this is the exact sort of idiocy that Coolhand uses on RBR to get people riled up so he can ban them.

He doesn't sound like a very nice person.

 

[Polish]

I believe Greg was a Clean Rider.

As a matter of fact, I believe Greg was the ONLY clean rider of his era!

But for the life of me I can't figure out WHY.
If we can figure that out - it might help us defeat the doping problem.

Was it because Greg was not interested in Fame & Fortune?
Nope, not in your wildest dreams.

Was it because Greg had a moral compass that pointed towards Good?
Lets just say No again and leave it there, wink wink nudge nudge.

Maybe Greg had Mentors and Coaches who were clean and strict?
Nopeski there for sure.

Maybe all the Dope Dealers sensed that Greg was the WhistleBlowing Type?
Maybe that is the reason. But how could they have known?
Joe Papp, any insights?

Anyway, Greg is awesome.

 

[ChrisE]

I didnt know about the downhill tailwind aspect of the time trial that would explain a lot unless of course there are other time trials set up like that ?
Nonetheless Greg also beat Fignon goign uphill on one fo the stages.,..no tailwind there..
I am not trying to discredit anyone just wondered when i saw fignons confession how greg was able to beat a doper when he has argued time and time again that you cant beat a doper without doping yourself?
as for my being a pr frontman for La since you bring iut up i am of the opinion he shoudve moved on a long time ago...he had his day in the sun. To badmouth contador the way he has is incomprhensible to me.
Lance is the past Ac is the future...as with greg...your not the king anymore..get over it and move on..

Does anyone care to address this legitimate statement, or will the CN forum denizens just hide behind the TROLL meme that's rolled out every time the conventional wisdom in here is challenged?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Does anyone care to address this legitimate statement, or will the CN forum denizens just hide behind the TROLL meme that's rolled out every time the conventional wisdom in here is challenged?

Where is the 'legitimate statement"?

Lemond didn't argue "time and time again" that the reason he was suspicious of LA was because he beat known dopers - he had spoken about doping many times before and only got involved in LA when it was discovered that LA was using Dr. Ferrari.

I would assume the reason the OP's been taken as a troll is because he starts a thread called "LEMOND the DOPER" and then appears clueless to many of the details.

 

[eleven]

It's amazing the lengths folks here will go to defend those they like (Lemond) while using every possible innuendo, rumor and suspicion to throw others under the bus. The poster has a point - Lemond beat an admitted doper in Fignon. How'd he do that? If that doesn't raise suspicion, you need to reconsider your own logic.

 

[luckyboy]

Does anyone care to address this legitimate statement, or will the CN forum denizens just hide behind the TROLL meme that's rolled out every time the conventional wisdom in here is challenged?

Cortisone and amphetamines are hardly blood doping in terms of performance-enhancing ability.

Amphetamines (stimulants) were very primitive and used to help the riders just keep going. The effect they have on the CNS mimic the effect of adrenaline. Users can feel more energetic & alert and less fatigued.

Cortisone, well, let's let Wikipedia explain "Cortisone, a glucocorticoid, and adrenaline are the main hormones released by the body as a reaction to stress. They elevate blood pressure and prepare the body for a fight or flight response. A cortisone injection can also be used to give short-term pain relief and reduce the swelling from inflammation of a joint, tendon, or bursa in, for example, the joints of the knee, elbow, and shoulder."

It's more likely that clean riders were winning before the 90s than they are now. Doping methods today give much more of an advantage than they used to.

It is plausible to say that Greg Lemond's physical ability (oft-quoted VO2 Max of 92.5ml/kg/min) could have won him the Tour without doping.

It's amazing the lengths folks here will go to defend those they like (Lemond) while using every possible innuendo, rumor and suspicion to throw others under the bus. The poster has a point - Lemond beat an admitted doper in Fignon. How'd he do that? If that doesn't raise suspicion, you need to reconsider your own logic.

It's probably best to know something about what you're talking about before you post..

 

[eleven]

It's probably best to know something about what you're talking about before you post. Even just a teensy bit might help..

I have a touch of knowledge on the topic. It's probably best to actually address the point instead of attempting to dismiss it with a poorly-placed piece of nonsense.

 

[Oldman]

It's amazing the lengths folks here will go to defend those they like (Lemond) while using every possible innuendo, rumor and suspicion to throw others under the bus. The poster has a point - Lemond beat an admitted doper in Fignon. How'd he do that? If that doesn't raise suspicion, you need to reconsider your own logic.

Lemond had other indicators that maybe he took the Kool-aid but it's been over-debated with no evidence. His assault on others in courts have also been heatedly debated and not much new information came from that. There are plenty of active riders with really serious credibility issues and it seems a more productive discussion than throwing more turds down this whirlpool.
When the same folks startup the same thread/new title=trolling.

 

[eleven]

Lemond had other indicators that maybe he took the Kool-aid but it's been over-debated with no evidence.

That I'll certainly agree with

His assault on others in courts have also been heatedly debated and not much new information came from that. There are plenty of active riders with really serious credibility issues and it seems a more productive discussion than throwing more turds down this whirlpool.
When the same folks startup the same thread/new title=trolling.

Point well taken, thanks.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have a touch of knowledge on the topic. It's probably best to actually address the point instead of attempting to dismiss it with a poorly-placed piece of nonsense.

What was 'the point'?

I have no idea if Lemond doped or not -but so far on this thread I have seen no-one come up with anything new on Lemond.

 

[eleven]

What was 'the point'?

I have no idea if Lemond doped or not -but so far on this thread I have seen no-one come up with anything new on Lemond.

The point was stated in my earlier post: It's amazing the lengths folks here will go to defend those they like (Lemond) while using every possible innuendo, rumor and suspicion to throw others under the bus.

 

[Ferminal]

Does anyone care to address this legitimate statement, or will the CN forum denizens just hide behind the TROLL meme that's rolled out every time the conventional wisdom in here is challenged?

Well if someone can't form a paragraph it's unlikely anyone is actually going to read more than a sentence.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

The point was stated in my earlier post: It's amazing the lengths folks here will go to defend those they like (Lemond) while using every possible innuendo, rumor and suspicion to throw others under the bus.

Well you wrote the following in an earlier post....

The poster has a point - Lemond beat an admitted doper in Fignon. How'd he do that? If that doesn't raise suspicion, you need to reconsider your own logic.

So you appear to be no better than 'them'.

 

[luckyboy]

I have a touch of knowledge on the topic. It's probably best to actually address the point instead of attempting to dismiss it with a poorly-placed piece of nonsense.

Basically, EPO is way more useful than cortisone and amphetamines (which Fignon admitted to taking in his book) if you want to win the Tour de France. Sure cortisone will help with the pain relief, but the stuff being used in 1989 was not really much compared to what came after..

Lemond beat an admitted doper in Fignon. How'd he do that?

More fun things to add - LA beat known dopers in 99, and the average speed went up in that year after Festina. It was not possible to win clean, which he didn't. In 1989 it was, due to the more primitive (and less effective) forms of doping.