Lemond's Legacy: How Lemond Changed Cycling

Page 6 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Big Doopie said:
i had to stop right there as you repeated this oft-repeated lie.
It's not a lie. Fignon was neither allowed to use clip-ons at the Merckx GP nor at the Baracchi Trophy. Hampsten was not allowed to use them at the Tour of Italy. They were not sanctioned by the UCI and break the UCI 3-point rule (Art.49 of the UCI ruling in 1989). It wasn't LeMond's fault but it's still an injustice ...

Big Doopie said:
first, kelly is not comparable. he is not even in the same league. he was a great champion, but just NOT in the same league.
Exactly. Kelly is in a league of his own. The two others can't hold a candle to him.

Big Doopie said:
as for what ifs... that is completely ridiculous.
Which 'what ifs'. I'm just stating facts.
Big Doopie said:
Le Monde newspaper did a poll of FRENCH people at the turn of the century and LeMond was voted the second greatest cyclist of the 20th century...
A popularity contest on one of the crappiest newspaper in a country does not care about anything but its own national tour. That is very convincing.
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Echoes said:
Clip-ons were prohibited then, okay?
No, they were not. They had already been used by multiple teams, in multiple races (Including the Giro) for months

Okay?
 
Echoes said:
It's not a lie
Yes it is. As RR states they were used months previously - even by the 7-11 team at tour de trump. Also fignon tried them and CHOSE not to use them.

Echoes said:
Which 'what ifs'. I'm just stating facts.
Um... When you whine that fignon had a giro and a tour-Paris stolen from him, you are asking us to add them to his palmares which is as good as a "what if". I could just as easily say Lemond had one TDF stolen from him by his team (1985), two stolen from him by a hunting accident, and one or two more stolen by riders being on EPO. I could whine "what if" like you, but I won't. :)


Echoes said:
A popularity contest on one of the crappiest newspaper in a country does not care about anything but its own national tour. That is very convincing.
Why do you think that a population that knows and understands the history of the sport would annoint an American who actually defeated two of their biggest champions?

Because of a popularity contest? More popular than Hinault? Or because they recognize how he forever changed the sport, and how his palmares does not reflect his immeasurable talent because of TONS of what ifs?
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
Echoes said:
It's not a lie. Fignon was neither allowed to use clip-ons at the Merckx GP nor at the Baracchi Trophy. Hampsten was not allowed to use them at the Tour of Italy. They were not sanctioned by the UCI and break the UCI 3-point rule (Art.49 of the UCI ruling in 1989). It wasn't LeMond's fault but it's still an injustice ...
Yates, winning the 1989 GP Eddie Merckx, on aero bars



Fignon using aerobars Grand Prix Des Nations one month after the Tour

 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Race Radio said:
Yates, winning the 1989 GP Eddie Merckx, on aero bars



Fignon using aerobars Grand Prix Des Nations one month after the Tour

...hate to have a fact get in the way of a great rant but it is a important fact Yates is not using clip-ons that were highlighted in your post but rather aerobars....and that was an critical distinction in those days....

... because there was another rule against the use of parts strictly for aerodynamic purposes which was used, mis-used, and mis-applied depending entirely on the discretion of the officials in charge of the event....thus Fignon was tossed at the Merckx GP for the having clip-ons yet Yates was allowed to race with aerobars because technically they weren't an addition ( and do remember LeMond used clip-ons )...and that all sounds daft but that was part of the joy of dealing with UCI regulation and their interpretation by local officials...

...and how does that play against the Art. 49 mentioned up thread..?....well, that Article does revolve around the three point rule and all aero bars/clip-ons violated that rule....and the fact aero thingees were used previously does not invalidate the rule but more correctly it does speak to what a mess the UCI was ( unlike now of course )...

Cheers
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
blutto said:
what a mess the UCI was
Not Greg's fault the UCI sucked

Multiple teams and riders used the bars in the Tour, before the Tour, and after the Tour as they did not break any rules. Fignon could have as well, he did not.....instead he spent a few weeks (Years) crying about them and played the victim. Boo hoo
 
Fact: Fignon tried out clip ons before the Versailles ITT.

Fact: Fignon CHOSE not to use them because (his words) "you do not make changes in technology in the middle of the TDF".

Fact: no one and no rule was stopping Fignon from using clip-ons.

Question: who is the cautious one now? and who was the risk-taker and innovator?
 
Race Radio said:
Multiple teams and riders used the bars in the Tour...
I don't believe that's accurate. Not in 1989. At the tour de trump several of the 7-11 team used them in May of that year. I don't believe any used them at the Tour. LeMond was the only rider to my knowledge that used them at the 1989 TDF. However, he was not breaking any rule, nor was Fignon refused the use at the TDF. In fact he tried them and CHOSE not to use them.

Again, the question gets turned around. Which one was the cautious one?
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Big Doopie said:
At the tour de trump several of the 7-11 team used them in May of that year. I don't believe any used them at the Tour.
....a little odd that don't you think?...the biggest race on the calendar and they don't bring a proven advantage....cautious...?.....or what...?....did they maybe read the rule book...?....

Cheers
 
blutto said:
....a little odd that don't you think?...the biggest race on the calendar and they don't bring a proven advantage....cautious...?.....or what...?....did they maybe read the rule book...?....

Cheers
Um... Huh?

What?

Can't make any sense of that um "argument"...

But I did notice u failed to answer almost all my points in the rest of my posts. Lol.

Cheers (I think) but I no longer am sure of anything you are trying to say so...um...
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Big Doopie said:
Um... Huh?

What?

Can't make any sense of that um "argument"...

But I did notice u failed to answer almost all my points in the rest of my posts. Lol.

Cheers (I think) but I no longer am sure of anything you are trying to say so...um...
...ok we'll try that again shall we....7-11 uses aerobars at the Dupont Tour...but they don't use this advantage when they subsequently come to the Tour....why would a team who had experience with aerobars not use them in the biggest, most important race in the world..?....

...and btw that was a question followed by a statement of fact followed by some questions....arguments were not in my post, they are down the hall...

Cheers
 
Aug 13, 2009
12,855
0
0
blutto said:
did they maybe read the rule book...?....
s
The rule book that allowed them to use them at Dupont, Olympics, and pretty much every TT since?

The reality is the UCI was fine with the bars, one guy was not. The same commissar stopped 7-11 from using them in the Giro as stopped Fignon in the GPEM. Same guy.

Funny how Fignon never filed a protest. Funny how Fignon himself admits he should have used the bars and blames his director for not insisting he use them.
 
Echoes said:
Surely 2 Worlds > 2 Milan-Sanremo and a Walloon Arrow, right. :rolleyes:

LeMond stole a Bore de France to Fignon. Clip-ons were prohibited then, okay? Fignon was stolen a Tour of Italy and a Paris-Tours, too. Despite that fact, the Fignon palmarès is still way superior to the LeMond palmarès. Let alone the Kelly palmares.

The three palmares according to my system:

Greg LeMond

3 Dauphiné 1981 2
2 Worlds 1982 4
2 Tour Med 1982 1
3 Tirreno 1982 1
World Championship 1983 9
Dauphiné-libéré 1983 4
2 Lombardy 1983 4
2 Nations 1983 1
4 Switzerland 1983 2
4 Paris-Tours 1983 2
10 Flèche wallonne 1983 2
10 Tirreno 1983 1
3 Tour de France 1984 8
3 Liège Bastogne 1984 4
3 Dauphiné 1984 2
5 Tirreno 1984 1
7 Netherlands 1984 1
8 Crit int. 1984 1
9 Ghent Wevelgem 1984 2
Coors Classic 1985 2
2 Worlds 1985 4
2 Tour of France 1985 8
2 Pais Vasco 1985 1
St Tour 1985 3
3 Giro 1985 7
4 Paris-Roubaix 1985 5
4 Ghent-Ghent 1985 1
4 Crit int. 1985 1
6 Tour med 1985 1
7 Flanders 1985 2
Tour de France 1986 20
St Tour 1986 3
2 Coors Classic 1986 1
2 Milan Sanremo 1986 4
3 Paris Nice 1986 4
3 Switzerland 1986 2
3 Crit int 1986 1
4 Tour of Italy 1986 7
St Italy 1986 2
4 Zurich 1986 1
4 Flèche wallonne 1986 4
7 Worlds 1986 2
World Championship 1989 9
Tour de France 1989 20
4 Crit int. 1989 1
3 St Tour 1989 9
6 Tirreno 1989 1
Tour of France 1990 20
2 Zurich 1990 1
4 Worlds 1990 4
10 Switzerland 1990 1
7 Tour of France 1991 6
4 Switzerland 1992 2
9 Paris Roubaix 1992 3
Greg LeMond 215


Laurent Fignon

Criterium international 1982 2
15 Italy 1982 3
Tour of France 1983 20
St Tour 1983 3
7 Spain 1983 2
7 Tirreno 1983 1
Tour of France 1984 20
5 St France 1984 15
2 Italy 1984 7
Montain Italy 1984 1
St Italy 1984 2
4 Nations 1984 1
7 Romandy 1984 1
8 Liège Bastogne 1984 2
2 Tour Midi Pyrenées 1985 1
3 Flèche wallonne 1985 4
3 Flèche brabançonne 1985 1
5 Liège Bastogne 1985 4
Flèche wallonne 1986 9
2 Nations 1986 1
6 Aude 1986 1
7 De Panne 1986 1
7 Vuelta 1986 2
8 Tour med 1986 1
2 Luxembourg 1987 1
3 Spain 1987 4
3 Paris Nice 1987 4
5 Criterium international 1987 1
6 Liège Bastogne 1987 2
6 Catalunya 1987 1
7 Tour of France 1987 6
St Tour 1987 3
Milan Sanremo 1988 10
2 Nations 1988 1
2 Paris Brussels 1988 2
2 Crit int 1988 1
3 Paris Roubaix 1988 5
4 Route du sud 1988 1
5 Paris-Nice 1988 4
8 Worlds 1988 2
8 Netherlands 1988 1
Tour of Italy 1989 16
St Italy 1989 2
Milan Sanremo 1989 10
Nations 1989 3
Netherlands 1989 2
Baracchi Trophy 1989 2
2 Tour of France 1989 8
St France 1989 3
4 Romandy 1989 2
6 Worlds 1989 2
6 Tour med 1989 1
6 Crit int. 1989 1
7 Liège Bastogne 1989 2
7 Haut Var 1989 1
Criterium international 1990 2
4 Paris Nice 1990 4
8 Route du sud 1990 1
6 Tour of France 1991 6
10 Paris Nice 1991 2
St Tour 1992 3
23 France 1992 2
Laurent Fignon 229


..and for uncultivated "fans" who don't know anything but Bore, the best palmares of the eighties:

Sean Kelly

2 Netherlands 1977 1
10 Romandy 1977 1
10 Midi-libre 1977 1
2 Union GP 1979 1
9 Worlds 1979 2
9 Belgium 1979 1
10 Ghent 1979 1
2 Brabant 1980 1
2 Haut-Var 1980 1
2 E3 1980 1
3 Amstel 1980 1
3 Ghent 1980 1
4 Vuelta 1980 4
4 Milan-Sanremo 1980 4
4 Belgium 1980 1
2 St France 1980 6
2 Dunkirk 1981 1
4 Arrow 1981 4
5 Francfurt 1981 1
6 Amstel 1981 1
6 Haut-Var 1981 1
6 Catalan Week 1981 1
8 Flanders 1981 2
9 Belgium 1981 1
9 Zurich 1981 1
St France 1981 3
Paris-Nice 1982 9
4 St Paris-Nice 1982 4
Haut-Var 1982 2
3 Worlds 1982 4
3 Francfurt 1982 1
3 Ghent 1982 1
4 Amstel 1982 1
5 Piedmont 1982 1
6 International Crit. 1982 1
7 Aude 1982 1
8 Arrow 1982 2
10 Liège-Bastogne 1982 2
15 France 1982 4
St France 1982 3
Lombardy 1983 10
Paris-Nice 1983 9
3 St Paris-Nice 1983 3
Switzerland 1983 4
International Crit. 1983 2
2 Piedmont 1983 1
5 Milan-Sanremo 1983 4
7 France 1983 6
8 Worlds 1983 2
9 Paris-Tours 1983 2
Paris-Nice 1984 9
2 St Paris-Nice 1984 2
Paris-Roubaix 1984 12
Paris-Tours 1984 6
Liège-Bastogne 1984 9
Basque Country 1984 2
Catalunya 1984 2
International Crit. 1984 2
2 Milan-Sanremo 1984 4
2 Flanders 1984 4
2 Nations GP 1984 2
3 Francfurt 1984 1
4 Switzerland 1984 2
5 France 1984 8
9 Med Tour 1984 1
Lombardy 1985 10
Paris-Nice 1985 9
2 De Panne 1985 1
2 Catalunya 1985 1
3 Paris-Roubaix 1985 5
3 Paris-Tours 1985 2
3 International 1985 1
4 France 1985 8
4 Liège-Bastogne 1985 4
4 Switzerland 1985 2
5 Paris-Brussels 1985 2
6 Basque Country 1985 1
7 Milan-Sanremo 1985 2
7 Nations GP 1985 1
7 Wevelgem 1985 2
9 Vuelta 1985 2
9 Netherlands 1985 1
10 E3 1985 1
10 Piedmont 1985 1
Paris-Nice 1986 9
3 St Paris-Nice 1986 3
Paris-Roubaix 1986 12
Milan-Sanremo 1986 10
Nations GP 1986 4
Basque Country 1986 2
Catalunya 1986 2
2 Flanders 1986 4
2 Lombardy 1986 4
2 Paris-Brussels 1986 2
2 De Panne 1986 1
2 International 1986 1
3 Vuelta 1986 4
5 Worlds 1986 4
6 Paris-Tours 1986 2
6 Arrow 1986 2
Paris-Nice 1987 9
St Paris-Nice 1987 1
Basque Country 1987 2
International Crit. 1987 2
2 Flanders 1987 4
2 De Panne 1987 1
4 Milan-Sanremo 1987 4
4 Paris-Brussels 1987 2
4 Nations GP 1987 2
4 Midi-libre 1987 1
5 Catalunya 1987 1
5 Worlds 1987 4
Wevelgem 1988 6
Vuelta 1988 9
Paris-Nice 1988 9
2 St Paris-Nice 1988 2
Catalan Week 1988 3
Haut-Var 1988 2
3 Paris-Tours 1988 2
4 Flanders 1988 4
5 Milan-Sanremo 1988 4
5 Lazio 1988 1
7 Ghent 1988 1
Liège-Bastogne 1989 9
2 Ghent 1989 1
3 Worlds 1989 4
3 Baracchi 1989 1
5 Milan-Sanremo 1989 4
6 De Panne 1989 1
7 Paris-Tours 1989 2
7 Tirreno 1989 1
9 France 1989 6
9 Paris-Brussels 1989 1
9 Piedmont 1989 1
15 Paris-Roubaix 1989 2
Tour of Switzerland 1990 4
2 Wincanton 1990 1
3 Clasica 1990 1
5 Worlds 1990 4
6 Montreal 1990 1
6 Tirreno 1990 1
8 Paris-Tours 1990 2
8 International 1990 1
9 Catalunya 1990 1
10 Lombardy 1990 2
30 France 1990 2
Tour of Lombardy 1991 10
4 Milan-Turin 1991 1
Milan-Sanremo 1992 10
4 Paris-Tours 1993 1
Sean Kelly 462



So now please stop with your LeMond ... :rolleyes:
Yep, Kelly was a better all rounder than Lemond...could climb and time trial better. What imbecility.
 
blutto said:
...ok we'll try that again shall we....7-11 uses aerobars at the Dupont Tour...but they don't use this advantage when they subsequently come to the Tour....why would a team who had experience with aerobars not use them in the biggest, most important race in the world..?....

...and btw that was a question followed by a statement of fact followed by some questions....arguments were not in my post, they are down the hall...

Cheers
Lol, u really thought I needed u to explain it to me?

My point was u have nothing to argue with my facts that are clearly stated, in fact no one has argued the fact that Fignon CHOSE not to use tha bars. How could u since it is well known that Fignon himself said so. So your argument simply based on that is completely and utterly moot.

And then all u have is to concoct some theory about 7-11's decision-making at the time. A theory based in absolutely zero factual evidence.

Roflmao! Holy crapola!
 
Big Doopie said:
agreed generally.

i think both sides have a point. fignon was untouchable in 1984 and -- because of injury -- we never saw that fignon again (even in 1989).

lemond -- though sick throughout much of that tour still finished third. would he have challenged if healthy. personally, i doubt it.

however, lemond in 1986 could have won by 15 minutes probably had he been allowed to express himself fully in the mountains -- he played the team game even the day he took the yellow jersey from hinault -- he never relayed zimmermann. lemond -- yes -- was cautious/tactical at times, he was also somewhat of a fish out of water joining the euro peloton as an american at the time and that might explain a lot. he was also a team player both to hinault and later to pensec.

like fignon's 1984. we never really saw the lemond of 1986 ever again.

however, if you watch the swiss tv version of the WCs in 1983, listen to merckx -- he comments that even he never won a WC alone by that much. no one in modern times won a WC by that much alone.

he was 23...

scary what could have been.

and then you add tactical sense. his tour win in 1989 was probably the greatest tactical win in cycling that i can think of. and the wc win that followed was as brilliant. he let fignon attack too soon. then pounced and crushed fignon as he passed him. he chased down almost every attack in the leading group despite kelly's arrival and then started the sprint from in front with over 300m to go.
I think Lemond had more natural ability than any in his generation, but I don't think he ever really exploited his true potential.

The fact alone that he was off hunting in early 87 was itself a demonstration of how unprofessional and lax he could be when not getting ready for the Tour.

Guimard said he thought Greg to have been the only champion that didn't actually have to "train" to win the Tour, which implied that he could do it on raw talent alone. Of course Lemond did actually train, but imagine if riding in today's sport when athletes start preparing for the July event over the winter the races he probably would have won. By contrast Lemond fattened up nicely over the winter and carried too much weight right up until June.

Today he would have had to be a more complete professional to even be competative, though even back then had he been European he'd probably not have put on as much weight over the winter and this would have reflected in his results. Merckx even said he thought Greg had the potential to win every type of race, but didn't because he missed something in his preparation. While Stephen Roche said that Lemond was the strongest rider he ever faced during his career: which means Greg was the strongest rider of his generation.

One thing I can't approve of in his career is thus that he won far less than his actual talent could have permitted and that he, especially after being shot, turned toward the Tour as the complete barometer of success. What a pitty for his own legacy and to a certain extent for the future of the sport.
 
Big Doopie said:
Yes it is. As RR states
Yeah you're quoting this comic who does not know what clip-ons are, does not know how many months are passing between July 23 and September 24 and who is lying and knows that he's lying ... Go ahead ...

Big Doopie said:
they were used months previously - even by the 7-11 team at tour de trump.
Yeah they were. At that race, the promoters would use all the dirty tricks to prevent Vanderaerden from winning because a victory for 7-Eleven on American soil was too important. Hence the use of illegal clip-ons and sending Vanderaerden into the wrong direction during the ITT. Lauritzen would never have won without that.

Fact remains that Hampsten was kept from using them at the Tour of Italy, Fignon was kept from using them at the Eddy Merckx GP. They were still illegal at the Baracchi Trophy and at the GP de la Libération before the UCI decided to sanction them before the Nations GP. The rest is irrelevant...


Big Doopie said:
Um... When you whine that fignon had a giro and a tour-Paris stolen from him, you are asking us to add them to his palmares which is as good as a "what if".
um what huh um I am not whining and I'm not asking you anything. I'm just observing facts. You are the fanboy, not me.

Big Doopie said:
and one or two more stolen by riders being on EPO.
It's amazing that I constantly need to repeat myself. In the EPO era LeMond could no longer put one foot ahead of the other, okay? he never was stolen anything because dozens of clean riders were already superior to him, okay? Unless you are being defamatory...


Big Doopie said:
Why do you think that a population that knows and understands the history of the sport
:D:D:D:D

I don't care about your Frogs, man. They don't know anything at cycling. They don't care about the classics, just like you. Is it clear?
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
kingjr said:
Or maybe they didn't and assumed wrongly that it was forbidden?
....actually as RR points out they did not assume anything, in fact they had the rule book applied to them at the Giro when they weren't allowed to race with the bars ( hence they had left their aero toys at home when they went to the Tour )( and it likely explains why they didn't bring the toys out when they saw LeMond use them in the first time trial )....

...and since both Fignon and LeMond were at that Giro there is a very high likelihood that they were aware of that decision....which helps explain the reluctance of Fignon/Guimard to use the bars ( and that btw was one of the other reasons given at the time in addition to the already mentioned reluctance to use new technology )

Cheers
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Race Radio said:
Not Greg's fault the UCI sucked

Multiple teams and riders used the bars in the Tour, before the Tour, and after the Tour as they did not break any rules. Fignon could have as well, he did not.....instead he spent a few weeks (Years) crying about them and played the victim. Boo hoo
But ewhat has that to do with the cold hard fact that Fignon at his peak was much stronger than Greg at his peak?

Again: all the facts: wattages and wins are pointing to the cold hard fact that Fignon was a bigger talent than Greg.

I can't help it that greg's palmares simply is rather limited compared to Laurent and is absolutely swarved by Hinault. It's simple, Greg was more important than aurent due to his nationalitty, but he was the lesser rider if we compare palmares. And in the end Palmares are what count.

rhubroma said:
Yep, Kelly was a better all rounder than Lemond...could climb and time trial better. What imbecility.
And so was Laurent. A better climber and a better Time Trial rider. Only problem was that Fignon was a vain idiot in 1989 as he was the stronger rider in wattage.

Lemond certainly did not steal that victory. Fignon was a dunce. Still doesn't change that Greg won a lot less important races.
 
Jul 4, 2009
9,666
0
0
Echoes said:
Yeah they were. At that race, the promoters would use all the dirty tricks to prevent Vanderaerden from winning because a victory for 7-Eleven on American soil was too important. Hence the use of illegal clip-ons and sending Vanderaerden into the wrong direction during the ITT. Lauritzen would never have won without that.

Fact remains that Hampsten was kept from using them at the Tour of Italy, Fignon was kept from using them at the Eddy Merckx GP. They were still illegal at the Baracchi Trophy and at the GP de la Libération before the UCI decided to sanction them before the Nations GP.
...and speaking of promoters with a vested interest to produce a certain result the promoter of the Tour had the "franchise" for a massive Tour of America which in those was seen as the cycling equivalent of the golden calf....it would definitely be to their advantage to have a newly minted American Tour champion help them push to get an American Tour off the ground....

...so it may well be they followed the winning formula already used at Dupont ( btw does anyone here know who owned the Dupont event...because I think it may have been the Tour organization... )....

Cheers
 
Franklin said:
But ewhat has that to do with the cold hard fact that Fignon at his peak was much stronger than Greg at his peak?

Again: all the facts: wattages and wins are pointing to the cold hard fact that Fignon was a bigger talent than Greg.

I can't help it that greg's palmares simply is rather limited compared to Laurent and is absolutely swarved by Hinault. It's simple, Greg was more important than aurent due to his nationalitty, but he was the lesser rider if we compare palmares. And in the end Palmares are what count.



And so was Laurent. A better climber and a better Time Trial rider. Only problem was that Fignon was a vain idiot in 1989 as he was the stronger rider in wattage.

Lemond certainly did not steal that victory. Fignon was a dunce. Still doesn't change that Greg won a lot less important races.
Show me the stats and if you think Kelly was a better climber and TT than Greg, then you obvioulsy don't have a clue.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
Big Doopie said:
one or two more stolen by riders being on EPO. I could whine "what if" like you, but I won't. :)
?
Are you claiming Andy Hampsten was dirty? This is the HUGE problem with the Myth which the fanboys miss as they are acting on emotion, forgetting other clean riders also put Lemond to the sword.

Clean Hampsten was much stronger in the Epo era than Greg. Any claim Greg would have rolled in a few more wins thus is not supported by facts.

Greg was a fantastic rider, but he was most certainly not the greatest of his generation. And there also was a bit more going on than Epo, he also was fading if we compare him to for example Andy Hampsten.

Greg's Legacy is quite simple: He was the first American to win the biggest race in the world.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
rhubroma said:
Show me the stats and if you think Kelly was a better climber and TT than Greg, then you obvioulsy don't have a clue.
Nobody says he was a btter climber or at TT's. You are the one who is erecting this strawman.

Denying Kelly was a greater all rounder is bizarre.
 
Franklin said:
Nobody says he was a btter climber or at TT's. You are the one who is erecting this strawman.

Denying Kelly was a greater all rounder is bizarre.
Winning the Tour 3 times means that Lemond was de facto a greater all rounder. Had a much bigger engine. That was my point.

You don't have a point.

Kelly was a great classics rider who won the Vuelta under exceptional circumstances, but to say that he was a better all rounder as a result, means you don't know what you are talking about.

Once again aske Stephen Roche who was the strongest rider he ever faced: not Hinault, not Fignon and certainly not Kelly.
 
May 26, 2009
3,687
1
0
rhubroma said:
Winning the Tour 3 times means that Lemond was de facto a greater all rounder. Had a much bigger engine. That was my point.

You don't have a point.
Oh I forget, you are one of those silly guys who only think cycling is the TdF.

/Thread
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY