Official Lemond doping talk thread

[Polish]

More like "Out of fear of being sued, I'll keep my baseless accusations to myself"

If any former rider with a family fortune measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars were to sue a forum poster - it would be Greg lol.

That would be a GREAT trial!

LeMond vs flicker.
A team of high priced lawyers vs flicker with a public defender.
Pick me for the jury pick me pick me.

 

[simoni]

1986
1: Lemond - Clean?
2: Hinault - No evidence, but 'doper' seems to be the Clinic consensus for whatever that's worth.
3: Zimmerman - No idea, although I note that his team was Carrera.
Points: Vanderaerden - Clean?
Mountains: Hinault - See above.

1989
1: Lemond - ?
2: Fignon - Admitted doper.
3: Delgado - Tested positive but not sanctioned.
Points: Kelly - Confirmed doper.
Mountains: Theunisse - Confirmed doper.

1990
1: Lemond: ?
2: Chiapucci - Conconi client; alleged to have admitted EPO use
3: Breukink - Alleged connection to doping through intralipid.
Points: Ludwig - East German; fired from T-Mobile after the OP broke.
Mountains: Claveyrolat - Not much. Maybe implicated by Kimmage?

Is this summary inaccurate? Tell me what I got wrong or missed.

Chiappucci - 2 week ban for high haemo towards the end of career (riding for asics - 1996?)

Kelly - what do we know about him? Not aware of anything myself

 

[Benotti69]

Chiappucci - 2 week ban for high haemo towards the end of career (riding for asics - 1996?)

Kelly - what do we know about him? Not aware of anything myself

Kelly doped, Wily Voet has detailed it when he was part of Kelly's team.

 

[Altitude]

More like "Out of fear of being sued, I'll keep my baseless accusations to myself"

How does one sue an anonymous clinic resident?

 

[Barrus]

How does one sue an anonymous clinic resident?

They can subpoena cyclingnews for his IP-adress and after that his ISP for his name and adress, after which they can make a case against him. An unsuccesful case in all probability, but a case none the less, which would inconvenience him. Now I don't think this is his reason for not indulging further, but a law suit none the less

 

[Benotti69]

Sure, Landis lives in a shack and sleeps on the sofa.....
Lance has no friends....
Sure, RR, whatever you say. Lance bribed the UCI $500,000....
EPO transformed Lance...he reacts better to EPO you know....


How many dopers did Greg ride with in the 1980's that are living with secret doping pasts that have never (and will never) become public knowledge? HUNDREDS.

Hundreds protected by old school omerta. The effective kind.

I suppose Wily Voet was part of that oh so strong never break the Omerta, he dumped on nearly everybody. no mention of GL. Fignon never doubted GL and if he did i am sure it would have been hinted at the very least in his book.

Fail polish yet again.

 

[Altitude]

They can subpoena cyclingnews for his IP-adress and after that his ISP for his name and adress, after which they can make a case against him. An unsuccesful case in all probability, but a case none the less, which would inconvenience him. Now I don't think this is his reason for not indulging further, but a law suit none the less

Ah thanks for the clarification-- didn't think it was possible.

 

[Barrus]

Ah thanks for the clarification-- didn't think it was possible.

Anonymity on the net does not exist. Everyone should be aware of that

 

[ultimobici]

Anonymity on the net does not exist. Everyone should be aware of that

Which is why I subscribe to the "Don't post on-line what you aren't prepared to say in person" school of thought.

 

[flicker]

More like "Out of fear of being sued, I'll keep my baseless accusations to myself"

Please, I have been spanked and I will behave. Excuse me for attacking your icon. Greg was an excellent athlete, lets leave it at that shall we?

 

[ultimobici]

Please, I have been spanked and I will behave. Excuse me for attacking your icon. Greg was an excellent athlete, lets leave it at that shall we?

I have no problem with your posts in general, but that one was way way out of line. To then post some "respect for......" garbage shows me that you don't have the courage of your convictions or are making it up.

If in your opinion Lemond doped, fine. Present us with the person who is his "Betsy Andreu" or "Stephen Swart" or similar person. If you can't then I suggest it is because they don't exist. Lemond may be wealthy but he isn't any more powerful than Lance, yet people are prepared to testify against the latter but not Greg. Doesn't add up to me.

It's not about smacking you down into acknowledging Lemond cleanliness. It's about pointing out the questionable way you supported your allegation.

 

[Escarabajo]

Anonymity on the net does not exist. Everyone should be aware of that

Maybe you should make a sticky out of this so that way Posters would be more careful when making up things. We, posters, think are protected in our anonymity, but it looks like this is not the case. I like that.

 

[Digger]

Please, I have been spanked and I will behave. Excuse me for attacking your icon. Greg was an excellent athlete, lets leave it at that shall we?

Flicker I have got things wrong on this forum - absolutely. Even my good friend Dr Maserati had to correct me a few weeks ago - However, I never knowingly typed incorrect information on here. There is a part of me that says fair enough to the above post and thinks say no more. But the other part of me thinks about what you've been saying for almost two years, on here, about Greg. You kept citing these anonymous sources and were never prepared to back these claims up with names - some very specific claims in some ways by the way. It's all there in your post history and I think it's a bit late for you to coming on saying 'lets leave it at that shall we?' And also a bit late to be talking about respect for Greg and his family. Now that you know they are reading it (well Scott anyway), you suddenly want respect to be shown. Two faced don;t you think?

 

[buckwheat]

They can subpoena cyclingnews for his IP-adress and after that his ISP for his name and adress, after which they can make a case against him. An unsuccesful case in all probability, but a case none the less, which would inconvenience him. Now I don't think this is his reason for not indulging further, but a law suit none the less

In the U.S. there is about a zero percent possibility of any conviction. Feel free to hand my IP address over to prospective litigants. I'm a little bored and I welcome lawsuits. Lets me know who I can counter sue.

 

[flicker]

I have no problem with your posts in general, but that one was way way out of line. To then post some "respect for......" garbage shows me that you don't have the courage of your convictions or are making it up.

If in your opinion Lemond doped, fine. Present us with the person who is his "Betsy Andreu" or "Stephen Swart" or similar person. If you can't then I suggest it is because they don't exist. Lemond may be wealthy but he isn't any more powerful than Lance, yet people are prepared to testify against the latter but not Greg. Doesn't add up to me.

It's not about smacking you down into acknowledging Lemond cleanliness. It's about pointing out the questionable way you supported your allegation.

First of all I wish Greg no ill will. His life has been put out there for all to see. Have you seen the video of his hunting accident on VERSUS during the tour. I want a good image of him and all of cycling. I believe in transparency and I hate doping. On the other hand there is a balance. If you want the whole truth and you hate doping you are going to hate cycling. So, why even go there. I hate to say this but I would rather believe in the myth. The truth will haunt us and make us really look at ourselves.

 

[Barrus]

In the U.S. there is about a zero percent possibility of any conviction. Feel free to hand my IP address over to prospective litigants. I'm a little bored and I welcome lawsuits. Lets me know who I can counter sue.

Like I said, unsuccesful, but a suit nonetheless.

Look I realize this discussion is partially my fault.
However let us stop this off-topic talk, if anyone wants to continue this discussion do so either in the cafe, or through pm

 

[Altitude]

We have made a mistake to speak against Lemond. He has money, time, and lawyers. He can destroy us.

 

[Digger]

First of all I wish Greg no ill will. His life has been put out there for all to see. Have you seen the video of his hunting accident on VERSUS during the tour. I want a good image of him and all of cycling. I believe in transparency and I hate doping. On the other hand there is a balance. If you want the whole truth and you hate doping you are going to hate cycling. So, why even go there. I hate to say this but I would rather believe in the myth. The truth will haunt us and make us really look at ourselves.

But clearly this is not true considering what you've continually said and claimed.

Look for the record i don't want to name call or insult you, bsaically because I am enjoying this thread. But I do feel entitled to point this stuff out.

 

[flicker]

This is not about Lance and LeMond, this is about life. I have been bad here do not be like me. Life is unfair and what I see from LeMond and Lance is that one has to overcome adversity. Those two as much as they hate one another are brothers they have overcome obstacles, they have shared the same pain and the same joy, however fleeting. Such is life, enjoy it while you are here.

 

[ultimobici]

First of all I wish Greg no ill will. His life has been put out there for all to see. Have you seen the video of his hunting accident on VERSUS during the tour. I want a good image of him and all of cycling.

Nope, being in Europe I am spared Versus.

I believe in transparency and I hate doping. On the other hand there is a balance. If you want the whole truth and you hate doping you are going to hate cycling.

To be against doping does not require one to hate cycling at all.

 

[flicker]

Nope, being in Europe I am spared Versus.

To be against doping does not require one to hate cycling at all.

Let me fill you in. Here is the juicy part. It is all shot in black and white, real 50s horror show. Greg is brought in and he is close to being in shock. He asks for pain medication and is refused. Why, because the hospital he was brought to is also the hospital that the prisoners from Folsom prison are brought to and the hospital policy is not to give pain medication because the prisoners just want to get high. Sad way to run a medical facility.

 

[nslckevin]

Blutto, the numbers from the graphs in other threads totally contradict what you are saying. They are already normalised for weight, and show that Lemond was consistently well behind Indurain when comparing Lemond's 89 tour win and Indurain's 94. They give:
Lemond: 395, 385, 385, 395 W
Indurain: 455, 415, 425, 425, 400, 435 W
Both calculated using 70 kg rider/ 8 kg bike.

And just to make it clear that these are already weight normalised, Lemond (68kg) did Alpe 'dhuez in about 43 minutes (he was 1:19 behind Fignon whoo got up there in just under 42 minutes). Indurain (81 kg) got up Alpe d'huez in 39:30 in 1994, according to the source of those figures.

Those numbers have no context. The only way they really mean anything is if each of those climbs by each of those riders was hit at full gas and alone. On Alpe d'Huez, Lemond and Hinault in 1986 for instance had a big gap on the chasing riders and agreed to ride together. Much different than any of Pantani's or Armstrong's rides up the Alpe. How much faster could either of them have gone if they had/wanted to? Who knows? Also note that those two got away on the previous climb and had been out front working hard for a while before they got to the climb. On the other hand Armstrong and Pantani for the most part got free rides to the bottom when they raced it. I can't remember Indurain's ride(s) up the Alpe, but I suspect that he had more of an armchair ride than Lemond and Hinault, and probably needed to ride the Alpe hard to either follow attacks, try to take time, etc.

Here's another data point to throw it all out of whack. I rode Alpe d'Huez this summer. Full gas and alone. 50:55 on 340 Watts. ~40W less (though I was closer to 74kg) and almost 3 minutes slower. So, a 49 year old amateur racer was only 3 minutes off of Lemond's time on Alpe d'Huez and you're going to use Lemond's time as a comparison against other riders???? I don't think that is going to compute with your model. In fact, I can pretty much garauntee that Lemond/Hinault's time was not fast for them.

Check this out: Timtoo timing

Other than Sandy Casar, it's all just a bunch of dorks like me who took the time to rent the timing chip. Seven of them went faster than Lemond/Hinault. Does that make them virtual Tour champions?

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I have posted this on numerous occasions - the case of the model who took google to court to identify someone who had defamed her on a forum.
Google had to name the 'blogger'

Other cases are in front of the courts at present - I have always written what I can back up, anonymity means little.

 

[buckwheat]

I have posted this on numerous occasions - the case of the model who took google to court to identify someone who had defamed her on a forum.
Google had to name the 'blogger'

Other cases are in front of the courts at present - I have always written what I can back up, anonymity means little.

Absence of malice standards are pretty difficult to overcome.

As for LeMond going after someone legally, a person on this forum could just point to FLTL and cite the phone conversation LeMond reported in which LA said he would get 10 people to say LeMond doped.

If you genuinely believe LA, that's enough of a defense.

 

[blutto]

Those numbers have no context. The only way they really mean anything is if each of those climbs by each of those riders was hit at full gas and alone. On Alpe d'Huez, Lemond and Hinault in 1986 for instance had a big gap on the chasing riders and agreed to ride together. Much different than any of Pantani's or Armstrong's rides up the Alpe. How much faster could either of them have gone if they had/wanted to? Who knows? Also note that those two got away on the previous climb and had been out front working hard for a while before they got to the climb. On the other hand Armstrong and Pantani for the most part got free rides to the bottom when they raced it. I can't remember Indurain's ride(s) up the Alpe, but I suspect that he had more of an armchair ride than Lemond and Hinault, and probably needed to ride the Alpe hard to either follow attacks, try to take time, etc.

Here's another data point to throw it all out of whack. I rode Alpe d'Huez this summer. Full gas and alone. 50:55 on 340 Watts. ~40W less (though I was closer to 74kg) and almost 3 minutes slower. So, a 49 year old amateur racer was only 3 minutes off of Lemond's time on Alpe d'Huez and you're going to use Lemond's time as a comparison against other riders???? I don't think that is going to compute with your model. In fact, I can pretty much garauntee that Lemond/Hinault's time was not fast for them.

Check this out: Timtoo timing

Other than Sandy Casar, it's all just a bunch of dorks like me who took the time to rent the timing chip. Seven of them went faster than Lemond/Hinault. Does that make them virtual Tour champions?

...aah more confusion...by the way the 89 and 94 numbers were both from a full bore ride up the Alpe...as for the confirmation of the validity of the 5.5/5.3 numbers...jury is still out...

...so how tough was the Alpe?...

Cheers

blutto