Reason for Lemond's decline

[marinoni]

I'm a big Lemond fan but something about his doping comments the last few years has been bugging me. His message seems to be that there was no decline in his fitness during the early 90's and that his decline and retirement were entirely due to the introduction of EPO, HGH, etc. However, anyone who followed the sport in those days knows this wasn't his story back then. He always said that his problems were a mystery and that his doctors were suspecting the lead pellets in his body were somehow causing the problem. In 92 his report in Winning magazine blamed fatigue from an overly long bus ride to the start in San Sebastian. Finally, in 94 the news came that he had mitochondrial myopathy and that was that. If, these days, he admitted that he gave these reasons because he didn't want to point the doping finger, then ok I get that but to my knowledge he hasn't. Any opinions?

 

[BroDeal]

Lemond has recently said that hard long training causes him problems. He theorizes that when he goes catabolic, some of the lead in the pellets is released.

I personally have always thought that Lemond went soft after 1989. He was too used to the good life and family life to devote himself as much to the sport as he once did.

The truth is probably a combination of several things. EPO use by the top contenders would be a big one, but there are probably several others.

I remember reading about Hooydonk and the gearing he used to attack on the Bosberg during one of his wins. It compared the gearing to another winner a couple of years after Hooydonk's last win and the difference was unbelievably huge. Hooydonk retired before he was thirty because he could no longer compete with the riders taking EPO.

 

[Bluebeard]

Finally, in 94 the news came that he had mitochondrial myopathy and that was that.

Does this mean that Greg Lemond is now a jedi?

 

[Zigster]

i have never heard indurain doped, and he beat lemond and bugno by 4 minutes in that '93 TT

bugno really of burst onto the scene in 1990 - i would not be surprised if he was one of that "italian renaissance" generation to use epo. indurain has always been considered squeaky clean, though.

don't forget how fat lemond got during winter

 

[blackcat]

i have never heard indurain doped, and he beat lemond and bugno by 4 minutes in that '93 TT

bugno really of burst onto the scene in 1990 - i would not be surprised if he was one of that "italian renaissance" generation to use epo. indurain has always been considered squeaky clean, though.

don't forget how fat lemond got during winter

lol

Indurain was not considered squeaky clean. He was considered a nice guy tho, and no one wants to stick the knife.

 

[issoisso]

lol

Indurain was not considered squeaky clean. He was considered a nice guy tho, and no one wants to stick the knife.

this.

Induráin was in no way clean. He did what the others alsodid.

 

[BigBoat]

early 90's and that his decline and retirement were entirely due to the introduction of EPO, HGH, ?

In the 80s they had test, HGH, corticoids, amphetamines... I believe Lemond was fairly clean for the vast majority of his career.

I believe the biggest reason for Lemond's decline was everybody jacking their crits with epo...It makes a MASSIVE diff...ITs the "pace" that really destroys clean riders day after day. If your clean you are not on HGH or corticoids to aid recovery and inflamation control and so you will slowly fall apart from constantly having to "redline it" to keep up with the pack thats riding at a higher overall pace from epo.

People who are jacked, if you watch them load epo and watch their FTP go up and their AWC repeatability rise you can see it takes longer for them to recover from initial workouts because their sustainable power output is simply higher. If you take epo you will notice this...Hard workouts in relation take longer to recover initially due to the higher overall pace.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

i have never heard indurain doped.

Client of Francesco Conconi, early doping mastermind, and the man widely accepted as being the physician that brought EPO into cycling. He also used Salbutamol up until it was banned. (Can't find link, if someone else can clarify). I mean, be logical, he rode during the EPO era when even HCT wasn't measured.

None the less, he was a very talented rider, who was on a powerful team that facilitated his riding style. He also rode in an era when the Tour seemed ITT happy, often having up to 200km of TT distance. Perfect for his style. Doping or not, he was a great champion and it's my opinion he would have won a few Tours anyway.

Greg has said that in 1991 he was as fit as he ever was, and finally fully 100% recovered from his gunshot, but the overall speeds were incredibly fast. He also burnt himself out going over the Tourmalet with his attacks, and was in no-man's land when bonked on Val Loran, which is where he lost that Tour.

EPO and other drugs are indeed a big reason he lost. But he also would get way out of shape in the off season, and keep in mind he had a pretty big ego, and probably assumed that he'd just whip everyone. He wasn't doped in 1991, but by all accounts, neither was Charley Mottet, who finished ahead of Greg that year.

 

[Escarabajo]

Greg has said that in 1991 he was as fit as he ever was, and finally fully 100% recovered from his gunshot, but the overall speeds were incredibly fast. He also burnt himself out going over the Tourmalet with his attacks, and was in no-man's land when bonked on Val Loran, which is where he lost that Tour.

EPO and other drugs are indeed a big reason he lost. But he also would get way out of shape in the off season, and keep in mind he had a pretty big ego, and probably assumed that he'd just whip everyone. He wasn't doped in 1991, but by all accounts, neither was Charley Mottet, who finished ahead of Greg that year.

I remember 1991 Tour. Greg made more enemies on the road than friends. That did not help even without the EPO.

 

[Kennf1]

Client of Francesco Conconi, early doping mastermind, and the man widely accepted as being the physician that brought EPO into cycling. He also used Salbutamol up until it was banned. (Can't find link, if someone else can clarify). I mean, be logical, he rode during the EPO era when even HCT wasn't measured.

None the less, he was a very talented rider, who was on a powerful team that facilitated his riding style. He also rode in an era when the Tour seemed ITT happy, often having up to 200km of TT distance. Perfect for his style. Doping or not, he was a great champion and it's my opinion he would have won a few Tours anyway.

Greg has said that in 1991 he was as fit as he ever was, and finally fully 100% recovered from his gunshot, but the overall speeds were incredibly fast. He also burnt himself out going over the Tourmalet with his attacks, and was in no-man's land when bonked on Val Loran, which is where he lost that Tour.

EPO and other drugs are indeed a big reason he lost. But he also would get way out of shape in the off season, and keep in mind he had a pretty big ego, and probably assumed that he'd just whip everyone. He wasn't doped in 1991, but by all accounts, neither was Charley Mottet, who finished ahead of Greg that year.

In 1991, the top three were clients of Conconi. A triumph of modern medicine.

 

[marinoni]

I remember 1991 Tour. Greg made more enemies on the road than friends. That did not help even without the EPO.

I don't understand what you mean. In 91 the coverage in North America was pretty useless so maybe I missed something. My understanding is that Lemond was always pretty popular within the peloton. Sean Kelly credits him with bringing the big bucks into the sport. He also said Lemond used to show up every spring with a "fat ****" moaning about how much he ate during the winter! Damn I love Kelly!
That said I guess I didn't make my question clear enough. My question isn't what caused his decline, it's why his reasons have changed since then.

 

[runninboy]

I guess I didn't make my question clear enough. My question isn't what caused his decline, it's why his reasons have changed since then.

He has said that he recently found out he was misdiagnosed in the early 90's. So being that it was not so much him being slower(which he was) It was the tremendous increase in speed in the rest of the peloton, ie Drugs. People don't get that fast in one year the old fashioned way

Remember Indurain went from basically a nobody, to a contender, to an animal who just rode people off his wheel, all in the span of a couple years which was attributed to a few kilo weight loss and a good work ethic
I guess it was not genetic because his brother never rode anyone off his wheel. Miguel was definitely on the juice. But still a nice guy, why drag him through the mud now?
As someone else said, LeMond was well liked at the time, Paul Kimmage mentioned in his book how great a champion Greg was and how he could suffer far more than anyone and still come back to win while lesser riders would simply drop out. Paul also mentioned Greg being clean and most every one else dirty at the time. Greg helped riders earn a decent living by changing the salary structure and everyone was well aware of it and thankful.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Good post Runningboy. Couldn't have said it better myself.

I'd add this. My gut tells me Greg had a hunch riders were using EPO, maybe as early as 1991, but thought it wouldn't do much more than corticoids, which he didn't need. But it was either disbelief, or the fact that he wasn't certain about it, plus the omerta that caused him to look elsewhere. If he would have just come out and said "There's this new drug, EPO, and everyone's on it", with ZERO proof of any sort, that would have certainly been the end of his career.

Years later his then presumptions became more obvious, and now are pretty much accepted.

I will add one more thing. Indurain was a physical specimen. Yes, Conconi helped him a great deal. Probably took him from podiums and wins, to multi-champion. But the guy had loads of talent, and I'll stick by what I said in my previous post about his career.

 

[pmcg76]

I agree with a lot of the posts on here but I think LeMonds decline was a combination of the arrival of EPO and his own health problems. Remember another supposedly clean rider Andy Hampsten was Top 10 until 93. I think the likes of Motter & Fignon(not clean but not doing EPO) retired because of the arrival of EPO.

I dont think Indurains arrival was at all sudden, he wore yellow in the Vuelta his first season and had some good results, his major improvement was in the mountains which is indeed surprising, I think Indurain was on EPO but maybe not until 92 and that amazing TT. His teammate Delgado declined during this era for some reason.

 

[Mongol_Waaijer]

Funny how whenever an averagely good rider suddenly becomes a GT Behemoth and annihilates everyone it's all down to a small weight loss, better work ethic and the new favourite - increased cadence.

Doctor Ferraris and their ilk have nothing to do with it.

 

[Escarabajo]

I don't understand what you mean. In 91 the coverage in North America was pretty useless so maybe I missed something. My understanding is that Lemond was always pretty popular within the peloton. Sean Kelly credits him with bringing the big bucks into the sport. He also said Lemond used to show up every spring with a "fat ****" moaning about how much he ate during the winter! Damn I love Kelly!
That said I guess I didn't make my question clear enough. My question isn't what caused his decline, it's why his reasons have changed since then.

I watched the Tour from Colombian television. He seemed a little too cocky that year. I read in the newspaper how he was overconfident of his abilities and I am sure he was not hiding his big ego from the others. For some reason I was hoping somebody would kick his a$$ that year. But now I like the guy a lot.

In that first stage to the Pyrenees he was almost arguing against everybody in the lead group (whatever the reason might be). I guess some of the riders were not happy about his attitude either.

I don't think the salaries of the Colombian riders were improved either (Little bit off topic but you stated it first).

Hey, don't get mad over my comments, I am just stating what my feelings were and how I saw things from the TV and the media stand point of view. If I am still off topic, don't worry I won't post again. Thanks.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

In that first stage to the Pyrenees he was almost arguing against everybody in the lead group (whatever the reason might be). I guess some of the riders were not happy about his attitude either..

I do think Greg was generally liked, but at that point a lot of people were looking to knock him off. They didn't like him so much they wanted him to win!

The first day in the Pyranees was to Jaca, and after Luc Leblanc took off, the pace was very fast and no one would help Greg chase. This is what I think you're talking about as to arguing with others. Lemond had also lost Boyer, Millar and Pensec on the road at this point, and had no teammates. In the link I provided below, he explains what he was arguing about, and has a good point.

The following day from Jaca to Val Loran is where his career turned, in almost unreal fashion, and I do believe this is where EPO made a difference. Greg crashed early in the stage but wasn't hurt. Later, he again found himself isolated but felt strong and tried to attack on the Aubisque, and faked attacks on the Tourmalet, all of which wore himself out - partly because he didn't think the others could be as strong as they were. By the time they hit Val Loruon he was done, and came in over 7 minutes back. I think if there were no EPO, Greg's attacks would have had better success. If not completely working, he wouldn't have been dropped the way he was. At the time it just seemed unbelievable. And well, we now know why.

Watch the 1991 Tour here.

Years later Gianni Bugno said he made two crucial mistakes in that Tour. One was on the Tourmalet not going with Indurain and Ciappucci, as he figured Lemond would recover for Val Louron - this left him riding some 30km on his own to the finish, and the other was bickering with Indurain about taking pulls on Alpe d'Huez instead of attacking him hard. Not that he would have won the Tour, but who knows? Makes for interesting stories.

 

[BigBoat]

I agree with a lot of the posts on here but I think LeMonds decline was a combination of the arrival of EPO and his own health problems. Remember another supposedly clean rider Andy Hampsten was Top 10 until 93. .

I've no doubt Hamsten used epo for his Alpe D'Huez win in 1992. E-P-O! Lemond couldnt even finish that Tour.

 

[BigBoat]

Funny how whenever an averagely good rider suddenly becomes a GT Behemoth and annihilates everyone it's all down to a small weight loss, better work ethic and the new favourite - increased cadence.

Doctor Ferraris and their ilk have nothing to do with it.

Yeah... And this will always be accepted by many tools. The average riders and the average fan try to relate their favorite rider to themselves, without realizing the massive amount of power it takes to just ride in the TDF, let alone win it.

 

[Escarabajo]

I do think Greg was generally liked, but at that point a lot of people were looking to knock him off. They didn't like him so much they wanted him to win!

The first day in the Pyranees was to Jaca, and after Luc Leblanc took off, the pace was very fast and no one would help Greg chase. This is what I think you're talking about as to arguing with others. Lemond had also lost Boyer, Millar and Pensec on the road at this point, and had no teammates. In the link I provided below, he explains what he was arguing about, and has a good point.

The following day from Jaca to Val Loran is where his career turned, in almost unreal fashion, and I do believe this is where EPO made a difference. Greg crashed early in the stage but wasn't hurt. Later, he again found himself isolated but felt strong and tried to attack on the Aubisque, and faked attacks on the Tourmalet, all of which wore himself out - partly because he didn't think the others could be as strong as they were. By the time they hit Val Loruon he was done, and came in over 7 minutes back. I think if there were no EPO, Greg's attacks would have had better success. If not completely working, he wouldn't have been dropped the way he was. At the time it just seemed unbelievable. And well, we now know why.

Watch the 1991 Tour here.

Thanks for the summary Alpe.

Honestly, I am not 100% sure about the EPO usage in that Tour. Or maybe the other riders went very easy on the "dosis" just to be on the safe health side. One day we'll know.

 

[Franklin]

I dont think Indurains arrival was at all sudden, he wore yellow in the Vuelta his first season and had some good results, his major improvement was in the mountains which is indeed surprising,

Well, insiders (among them dutch magazine Wielerrevue) had crowned him crown-prince of Delgado years before he won the TdF. He had won the big young guy race (besides the peace tour), the Tour de L'Avenir 1986. Then 1989 he broke through with wins in Paris Nice, Catalunya, Crit International. Also his climbing was improving every year (in 1989 and 1990 he was already up there in the TdF)

Miguellon as he then was called was those years the major domestique of Perico who already was stating in interviews that one day he would be domestique for Miguel.

So no, Miguel Indurain wasn't a surprise at all.

 

[Zigster]

I guess it was not genetic because his brother never rode anyone off his wheel. Miguel was definitely on the juice. But still a nice guy, why drag him through the mud now?

yeah but his brother was an actual professional cyclist not a bum - they aren't twins. not everyone hits the lotto.

you must wonder why Jamie Hincapie is sewing shorts instead of riding his last tour.

From a physiological standpoint there must have been some metrics that doctors identified in Indurain (VO2?) that encouraged them to take an active role in controlling his weight.

 

[issoisso]

Well, insiders (among them dutch magazine Wielerrevue) had crowned him crown-prince of Delgado years before he won the TdF. He had won the big young guy race (besides the peace tour), the Tour de L'Avenir 1986. Then 1989 he broke through with wins in Paris Nice, Catalunya, Crit International. Also his climbing was improving every year (in 1989 and 1990 he was already up there in the TdF)

Miguellon as he then was called was those years the major domestique of Perico who already was stating in interviews that one day he would be domestique for Miguel.

So no, Miguel Indurain wasn't a surprise at all.

Quite right. That Induráin "came out of nowhere" is an often repeated myth.

It's quite the opposite: by the time he finally won a mountain stage 1990, people had been saying for a while that he was taking so long to fulfill his tremendous promise, that quite possibly he would end up never fulfilling it.

 

[BroDeal]

From a physiological standpoint there must have been some metrics that doctors identified in Indurain (VO2?) that encouraged them to take an active role in controlling his weight.

If I remember the story right, when Indurain won the Tour of the Future, Dr. Conconi tested him. Conconi determined that he was an ideal subject. The two then embarked on a five year plan to bring him to the top.

I am not sure I believe the weight loss story that much. Although I am sure there was some, it smells too much like Armstrong's lies about weight loss.

 

[marinoni]

I watched the Tour from Colombian television. He seemed a little too cocky that year. I read in the newspaper how he was overconfident of his abilities and I am sure he was not hiding his big ego from the others. For some reason I was hoping somebody would kick his a$$ that year. But now I like the guy a lot.

In that first stage to the Pyrenees he was almost arguing against everybody in the lead group (whatever the reason might be). I guess some of the riders were not happy about his attitude either.

I don't think the salaries of the Colombian riders were improved either (Little bit off topic but you stated it first).

Hey, don't get mad over my comments, I am just stating what my feelings were and how I saw things from the TV and the media stand point of view. If I am still off topic, don't worry I won't post again. Thanks.

Mad? Nah, I'm a big boy. Thanks for the other perspective. The US network showing the Tour back then wasn't over the top like Versus is with Lance "fancy legs" but still, you weren't going to hear any criticism of Lemond there.
As for the Columbian riders, yeah what was up with that? It never seemed like they were accepted by the rest of the peloton or the cycling establishment. Pretty strange considering how good Lucho Herrera, Parra and the others were.