podcast of the year. lemond is class and real.

[davidg]

Awww. Got your panties in a wad because retro-tested urine showed that Armstrong used EPO during the 1999 TdF? Maybe if you stick your head in the sand like you are encouraging everyone else to do then the truth will just go away.

I'm not sticking my head in the sand. All I am saying is that no-one that I am aware of, has specifically said LA doped without hiding behind a screen name. That is because in a court of law, they cannot prove it, and would be guilty of libel or slander. Refer to forum sticky re defamation.

I am not saying he didn't dope, I am just saying that until you have proof, stop regurgitating the same old rhetoric.

 

[BroDeal]

I'm not sticking my head in the sand. All I am saying is that no-one that I am aware of, has specifically said LA doped without hiding behind a screen name. That is because in a court of law, they cannot prove it, and would be guilty of libel or slander. Refer to forum sticky re defamation.

Go look up what Ashenden and Parisotto have said on the subject. A link to the recent Ashenden interview was posted in this forum. Read it and refute it.

The evidence that Armstrong doped is more than enough to meet the preponderance of evidence for a civil trial. Heck, it is more than enough to meet the beyond a reasonable doubt criteria of a criminal trial. Of course, Armstrong has a giant hurdle out there. He was offered the chance to have the 1999 TdF samples retested at a lab of his choice. He refused.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

David - You need to read this interview with Michael Ashenden.

When you're done, come back and let us know why what Ashenden said is incorrect.

If that's not enough, take a look at the testimony in the SCD trial. Look at the IM between Jonathan Vaughters and Frankie Andreu. Look at the testimony from Steven Suart, Emma O'Reilly, Mike Anderson. It goes on and on and on.

If you do and still feel Lance never doped, simply because he hasn't been legally convicted, I'm not sure what else to say.

 

[Animal]

I just watched the video.

Very good. He should be in charge of USA Cycling.

 

[BroDeal]

I just watched the video.

Very good. He should be in charge of USA Cycling.

He should be in charge of the UCI. If nothing else it would be great to watch the old guard squirm.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

That would be very positive, but until there's a total flush, it's not going to happen in either case. Recall that the UCI is suing Lemond for calling them "corrupt", which is of course what they are and anyone with a half of brain can see that. But they're perhaps hoping by suing him he'll shut up and go away so they can continue to have their cake and eat it too and pretend they are cleaning up the sport.

 

[tashimi76]

Wow, only just listened to this recently and I really liked his discussion. Not really surprised I guess but great all the same. He's a great speaker. I passed it on to some friends who aren't on this forum (that I know of).

 

[Kennf1]

From what I read, most comments agreed with GL's move to rid the sport of doping, but did not agree with him implicating LA at the same time, with no PROVEN evidence. My opinion too.

GL must truly be an amazing athlete, since from what I can judge from these forums, he is the only Tour winner in history to do so without any kind of PED at all. Incredible athlete.

So your knowledge of Lemond is from this forum? Been following the sport long?

 

[alphonso]

How does Lemond compare?

Oh yes - Greg Lemond was and still is the greatest American cycle racer ever and is with out a doubt my hero, well maybe 2nd place after Sean Kelly now I think about it.

I saw Lemond at Superbagnieres (Luchon) in 1986 and also some distance from St Etienne after the time trial stage the same year. For me that is still the greatest edition of the tour in the modern era. Lets not forget who he took on in that race - yes thats right - you've got it - the taciturn scotsman Robert Millar! No just kidding, I mean Hainault of course.

I also saw Greg having a pensive moment at the marine mammals exhibition in London's Natural History Museum. I regret not approaching him and shaking his hand there and then as there was no one else in the hall at the time.

May I ask our American friends how they rate Greg Lemond against other international american sportsman apart from Lance Armstrong?

Cheers and happy cycling.

 

[alphonso]

Lemond heritage

By the way according to my Six Day Racing book Greg Lemond is the great nephew of legendary six day racer Bobby Walther Snr. So it is in the genes.

 

[Green Hornet]

I’ve been riding and racing for more than25 years. There was a time when I thought Greg was a truly amazing man. Now I have reduced that opinion to amazing athlete only.

His behavior has done quite a bit to hurt the sport – not help it. I was so fed up with professional cycling last year I had given up following it all until I had the opportunity (along with many other cyclists) to take a 2 pound hammer to Greg’s nuts. Not for real of course- but it was a signed poster.

Funny thing – I began feeling better and even watched the rest of the tour.

For me Greg is a self-serving turd now. A damn shame.

 

[180mmCrank]

I’ve been riding and racing for more than25 years. There was a time when I thought Greg was a truly amazing man. Now I have reduced that opinion to amazing athlete only.

His behavior has done quite a bit to hurt the sport – not help it. I was so fed up with professional cycling last year I had given up following it all until I had the opportunity (along with many other cyclists) to take a 2 pound hammer to Greg’s nuts. Not for real of course- but it was a signed poster.

Funny thing – I began feeling better and even watched the rest of the tour.

For me Greg is a self-serving turd now. A damn shame.

Wow - really has gone from hero to zero in your view.

I don't know the man and have only my knowledge of what is in the public domain to go on but he seems like a genuine guy to me.

I try to put myself in the shoes of someone who was entirely defined by their sport - cycling. He was at the top of his sport and winning the Tour and then quite suddenly this all slipped away. Some of this I think was self inflicted, the drive and obsession that took him to number one ultimately was also his undoing - cronic overtraining. And it seems clear that others in the sport were benefiting from PEDs. I am not surprised (particularly if he was riding clean) that he is angry and put that together with his passion ... well you have a recipe for much of what we have seen play out over the last few years.

For me - just because he speaks out and just because at times he has done so in a less than helpful way (both for himself and the point he is trying to get across) does not change my opinion that he is both a great cyclist and a decent guy.

I hope history will be respectful of the man and his achievements.

 

[pmcg76]

Some people get very deep here, for me LeMond was first a hero for winning the 89 Tour but then an American money grabber who focused solely on winning the Tour.

With the benefit of hindsight, I would have a lot of sympathy for Greg, I dont agree that EPO was the definitive reason for the decline of LeMond as Andy Hampsten was miles in front of LeMond in 92/92 and he was supposedly clean. It undoubtedly played a part though. Scottish rider Robert Millar once labelled him the John Wayne of cycling which I feel may have had deeper significance than originally intended.

For LeMond v Lance, this started when Greg said he was disappointed to hear Lance was working with Dr.Ferrari, to me this is similar to Carl Lewis saying he would be dissappointed to hear Usain Bolt was working with a guy from the BALCO affair. Not a particularly controversial comment, just a reflection of how many people would feel. Lance as is his way, then proceeded to turn LeMond into a troll & it has stuck ever since.

LeMond has become an opponent of doping in sport and as this conflicts with Lances views, he natrally becomes a figure of hate. Pity, but I have more time for a guy like LeMond than Lance anyday.

 

[euphrades]

For LeMond v Lance, this started when Greg said he was disappointed to hear Lance was working with Dr.Ferrari, to me this is similar to Carl Lewis saying he would be dissappointed to hear Usain Bolt was working with a guy from the BALCO affair. Not a particularly controversial comment, just a reflection of how many people would feel. Lance as is his way, then proceeded to turn LeMond into a troll & it has stuck ever since.

I completely agree with this. Lance is the type of guy that once you say something bad about him he will just bully you until you back down. Greg just doesn’t back down.

I was 17 when I turned on the TV and saw the ABC sports coverage of the 1989 TDF stage where Lemond won the first TT of that years Tour. I was captivated and even more so learning of his problems with the hunting accident. Lemond is who got me brought into the sport of cycling not Lance.

His behavior has done quite a bit to hurt the sport – not help it. I was so fed up with professional cycling last year…….For me Greg is a self-serving turd now. A damn shame.

So you are saying that Lemond is the one that is ruining pro-cycling? I completely disagree…..its the ones getting caught doping, the constant excuses, the finger pointing, the cover ups (Spanish Federation and the UCI).

I think I remember Greg saying the UCI was a big problem and he agreed with the ASO. Look at what the French did last year….they got a bunch of dopers
Greg has done more for cycling and continues to do more for cycling than most including Lance. He brought cycling salaries to where they should have been, introduced cycling computers, helmets, areo bars, and etc. Today he is trying to help combat the doping issues and is helping…does he go about it the right way all the time no because he is passionate, and his emotions about cycling sometimes gets in the way.

I do believe ePO changed cycling forever…it started the science and systematic doping programs and after 1992 you saw a lot of good cyclist from that era fall away; Steve Bauer, Andy Hampsten, Pedro Delgado, Claudio Chiappucci, Raul Alcala, and Eric Breukink. Yes, Andy did well in 1992 and so did Chiappucci but they quickly disappeared.

As for Greg Lemond I support him.

 

[JayZee]

I have great respect for GL as a cyclist and I think he is generally spot on regarding doping. However, I wish he would take a different or more effective approach to change. Right now he is just an outsider taking pot shots at the sport, but not really putting his money (time or name) where his mouth is. I would like to see GL get involved in cycling, whether it be from within a team (like Vaughters) or within USA Cycling in some manner. It is easy to point out the faults and the problems, but harder to fix them. Right now GL is in no position to make a difference. If he feels so strong about cycling and its future, then step up and get involved.

 

[BroDeal]

I completely agree with this. Lance is the type of guy that once you say something bad about him he will just bully you until you back down. Greg just doesn’t back down.

I was 17 when I turned on the TV and saw the ABC sports coverage of the 1989 TDF stage where Lemond won the first TT of that years Tour. I was captivated and even more so learning of his problems with the hunting accident. Lemond is who got me brought into the sport of cycling not Lance.

So you are saying that Lemond is the one that is ruining pro-cycling? I completely disagree…..its the ones getting caught doping, the constant excuses, the finger pointing, the cover ups (Spanish Federation and the UCI).

I think I remember Greg saying the UCI was a big problem and he agreed with the ASO. Look at what the French did last year….they got a bunch of dopers
Greg has done more for cycling and continues to do more for cycling than most including Lance. He brought cycling salaries to where they should have been, introduced cycling computers, helmets, areo bars, and etc. Today he is trying to help combat the doping issues and is helping…does he go about it the right way all the time no because he is passionate, and his emotions about cycling sometimes gets in the way.

I do believe ePO changed cycling forever…it started the science and systematic doping programs and after 1992 you saw a lot of good cyclist from that era fall away; Steve Bauer, Andy Hampsten, Pedro Delgado, Claudio Chiappucci, Raul Alcala, and Eric Breukink. Yes, Andy did well in 1992 and so did Chiappucci but they quickly disappeared.

As for Greg Lemond I support him.

+1 except for El Diablo. I was a big fan of this, but he was one of the first to reap huge rewards with the "Italian training methods." As others got on the program, he did not have the same advantage he did in the early 90s. Later in Chiappucci's career he was suspended for having too high of a hematocrit.

 

[BikeCentric]

I’ve been riding and racing for more than25 years. There was a time when I thought Greg was a truly amazing man. Now I have reduced that opinion to amazing athlete only.

His behavior has done quite a bit to hurt the sport – not help it. I was so fed up with professional cycling last year I had given up following it all until I had the opportunity (along with many other cyclists) to take a 2 pound hammer to Greg’s nuts. Not for real of course- but it was a signed poster.

Funny thing – I began feeling better and even watched the rest of the tour.

For me Greg is a self-serving turd now. A damn shame.

I wonder if you'd be willing to elaborate on your views? Do you think that people should just pretend that PED's are not being used in the sport? We should go back to the days of Omerta where the image of cycling must not be tarnished with reality? I take you think cyclists should be free to use drugs and we should all just not talk about it? Seriously, I would appreciate it if you'd enlighten me on your thought process because I've never heard anything like this from a fellow cyclist.

 

[BikeCentric]

+1 except for El Diablo. I was a big fan of this, but he was one of the first to reap huge rewards with the "Italian training methods." As others got on the program, he did not have the same advantage he did in the early 90s. Later in Chiappucci's career he was suspended for having too high of a hematocrit.

Chiapucci was one of the athlete's who was doped by Conconi. In the Italian trial against Conconi a spreadsheet was used as evidence that contained a chart of the blood values of many Italian cyclists going back approximately 5 years. Chiappucci was on that chart and consistently had a hematocrit approaching 50% for his big races. Not possible without blood doping.

 

[euphrades]

+1 except for El Diablo. I was a big fan of this, but he was one of the first to reap huge rewards with the "Italian training methods." As others got on the program, he did not have the same advantage he did in the early 90s. Later in Chiappucci's career he was suspended for having too high of a hematocrit.

I didn't want to make an assumption without proof. So it was coincidence he fell off after 1992.

 

[flyor64]

I have great respect for GL as a cyclist and I think he is generally spot on regarding doping. However, I wish he would take a different or more effective approach to change. Right now he is just an outsider taking pot shots at the sport, but not really putting his money (time or name) where his mouth is. I would like to see GL get involved in cycling, whether it be from within a team (like Vaughters) or within USA Cycling in some manner. It is easy to point out the faults and the problems, but harder to fix them. Right now GL is in no position to make a difference. If he feels so strong about cycling and its future, then step up and get involved.

I agree that a different tact may help in his fight...but passion often overrides tact.

I generally do not theorize conspiracies...but it's quite possible that he's not in any positions you mention because someone/somebody does not want him in those positions...

It's a sad period in our sport when one of the greats is considered an outsider...

 

[BroDeal]

II would like to see GL get involved in cycling, whether it be from within a team (like Vaughters) or within USA Cycling in some manner.

USA Cycling is owned by friends of Armstrong. There is no way they let Lemond have anything to do with the organization.

 

[JayZee]

If that is true (that USA Cycling wouldn't have him, which strikes me as some anti-Lance paranoia, but assuming it is true), then get involved with a team. There are a number of small development teams that could certainly use guidance and direction from someone with as much experience as GL. Heck, start his own team. Again, I think Jonathan Vaughters is a great example of working for change within the system.

 

[BikeCentric]

If that is true (that USA Cycling wouldn't have him, which strikes me as some anti-Lance paranoia, but assuming it is true), then get involved with a team. There are a number of small development teams that could certainly use guidance and direction from someone with as much experience as GL. Heck, start his own team. Again, I think Jonathan Vaughters is a great example of working for change within the system.

Greg actually is a sponsor for Garmin/Slipstream with Vaughters - he states that in the linked podcast.

 

[BroDeal]

If that is true (that USA Cycling wouldn't have him, which strikes me as some anti-Lance paranoia, but assuming it is true),...

You might want to check out Thomas Wiesal and his relationship to Armstrong, Tailwind Sports, and USA Cycling. Then check out how Jim Ochowicz and Steve Johnson are connected. The aristocracy of the cycling in the U.S. is more interbred than the Julio-Claudians.

 

[Ziptie]

I take you think cyclists should be free to use drugs and we should all just not talk about it? Seriously, I would appreciate it if you'd enlighten me on your thought process because I've never heard anything like this from a fellow cyclist.

Wow. That's kind of a stretch isn't it? How does not liking Lemond make you and advocate of doping?

Why do these threads always have to pit the retro-grouches against the Lance lovers? As if it were wrong to like one or the other. And BTW, if you go back and read the posts there's just as much gushing and hero worshiping going on here than in any Lance "fanboy" thread. Besides, every one knows the greatest American cyclist was Major Taylor.

IMO Lemond IS A CRANK, every bit as much of one as Lance is a tyrannical megalomaniac. There is little doubt in my mind that Lance doped at some point in his career, just as there's little doubt that Lemond probably DID NOT. But what I don't like about Greg is the way he paints himself as having always been outspoken about doping. I'm sorry, but giving the right answers in a handful of interviews back in the 80's doesn't make you a crusader.

Even if it was dozens upon dozens of interviews (which it wasn't), he didn't start pointing fingers and naming names until Lance came along. Which means for years he rode alongside riders who were using and he kept his mouth shut. It seems that as long as he was winning it was OK that people around him were using. And the argument that he didn't know what was going on around him, be it EPO or some other form of PED, is completely laughable. It's impossible to ride in the professional peloton and not know who the dopers are. This is true from as far back as the 20's when Henri Pelissier told a journalist after showing him all things he had taken, "we run on dynamite."

This doesn't mean Lemond shouldn't be out there fighting the good fight, it just means he should be honest with himself and the rest of us. Stop pointing fingers and take an active role. That's just my 2.