VeloCity said:Because, as has been pointed out over and over and over again, there IS evidence that the other successful riders you noted were doping which you conveniently choose to ignore, while with Lemond there is nothing. And that's not proof that Lemond was clean, but you need at least something to suggest that he was doping and - again, unlike the others - there isn't a single thing.
given access to all available evidence, prosecutors with willpower, and no statute of limitations, i do not believe there is enough evidence to suspend many of the TdF winners mentioned upthread for doping infractions. including Greg Lemond.
without the confession i don't think Riis could have been caught. without the confession i don't think Fignon was particularly suspected.
i really want to avoid going into specifics here because i don't want to get into comparing the merits of different bits of hearsay, or mudslinging. however in fact there are already several such tidbits posted on this thread, for example post #118. so you cannot say there is no hearsay.Race Radio said:There is not even hearsay against Lemond.
trying to deny this makes it hard to believe other stuff you say. who do you think suggested the iron and B12 shots? who drew up the training plans? who operated after his injuries? who prescribed antibiotics when he had a cold?Race Radio said:If you are so sure Greg was working with a Medical advisor then it should be easy for name them.
it still seems to be pretty irrelevant to me. what exactly is your point with this? i'm very worried that you keep bringing it up as a sort of "even if he was doping it wasn't a big deal" type of defense.Race Radio said:EPO gives a far greater amount of improvement then anything available in the 80's. That you try to dismiss this as irrelevant shows you are either ignorant or playing games.