• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Speech by Greg Lemond

Page 15 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
A

Anonymous

Guest
joe_papp said:
So is the consensus that LeMond's messaging was very poorly executed from a technical perspective (presentation and delivery), but his content was solid - or at least would have been had the technical aspect of his speaking effort been equal to LA's technical execution in his TdF's, or was LeMond judged poorly not just on technical merits, but on the quality of his content?

I ask because during the one-on-one conversations Ive had with him, or with him and his wife, he's been very Lucid, powerful in his delivery of a consistent, fact-based message. He has a tendency to move rapidly from topic to topic, seemingly in a disjointed manner, but must in his own mind have a unique organizational structure because he can return to topics that seemed to me to be unresolved, totally dropped, and not only wrap them up, but use them as transitions to the next theme.

I always thought both Pat McQuaid and Greg LeMond should have image consultants/communication experts, but not dudes/chicks from these high-power pR firms, but rather, similarly talented people from w/in the world of cycling, or at least effective, competent people who understood a significant component of professional road cycling, so as to be able to help these guys not make asses of themselves in the media, and not set them selves up to be made asses of...

LeMond is not a raving lunatic. He is really smart, he's really well-versed in his anti-doping ideas, but he is like a scatterbrain sometimes - like the brilliant professor who forgets his notes or leaves home w/o his laser pointer.

Are you asking because you may get to talk to him about it?

I opened a thread on here trying to flesh out the practical problems in using power meters to ban riders.

I think in the end most though it not practical, or at least it's not clear how it could be made practical.

Devil in the details kind of thing.
 
joe_papp said:
I always thought both Pat McQuaid and Greg LeMond should have image consultants/communication experts, but not dudes/chicks from these high-power pR firms, but rather, similarly talented people from w/in the world of cycling, or at least effective, competent people who understood a significant component of professional road cycling, so as to be able to help these guys not make asses of themselves in the media, and not set them selves up to be made asses of...

I think Joe is trying to find a new job. :D

Don't do it, Bro...at least not for McQuaid. It would take out of the sport much of the soap opera we love to discuss.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BroDeal said:
I think Joe is trying to find a new job. :D

Don't do it, Bro...at least not for McQuaid. It would take out of the sport much of the soap opera we love to discuss.

maybe he is but doesn't realize it yet.
 
grimpeur said:
I think what's is going on is that Lemond wants the omerta cracked—broken open, regardless of anyone's record or past. The LA "haters" want the same thing. The Armstrong supporters have no problem with "business as usual" and don't think an omerta exists nor that LA is part of one. And if LA is part of one, so what, that's cycling. You're ruining our hero worship.

bang on correct
 
Jun 23, 2009
14
0
0
Visit site
BigChain said:
GO AND RIDE YOUR BIKES

I agree.

You guys (and I presume some girls) should get out and ride your bikes more often - clearly you spend too much time in this forum talking CR**.

There is barely a fact to be found. Innuendo. Heresay. No proof provided with any statement. Ridiculous assumptions. Totally innane comments. Wild accusations. etc etc.

Really - go and ride your bike more. I've never read so much CR** and most of the posts are by the same people. A bunch of WAN**** really!

Agree 100%:)
Lack of evidence = dogma!
Personal beliefs are useless without factual support regarding these individuals!
Let this post die... waste of time!!!
 
Jun 22, 2009
4,991
1
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
Here are some facts for you: Armstrong tested positive for EPO six times, and Lemond has been right all along.

And how many of your nearly 1,200 posts in barely four months express more or less the same bitter opinion? :rolleyes:

Give it a rest, fella. It's boring and obsessive.
 
Apr 16, 2009
394
0
0
Visit site
Amsterhammer said:
And how many of your nearly 1,200 posts in barely four months express more or less the same bitter opinion? :rolleyes:

Give it a rest, fella. It's boring and obsessive.

Why are the facts expressing a "bitter opinion"?
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
I'm certainly not bitter. I dont really give a crap if people dope, in fact I think its better that way. LOL :)

I say, let athletes dope fully >> why do we dilude ourselves that a corrupt system is somehow going to change?
 
Mar 10, 2009
504
0
0
Visit site
Dude, where does you post end, and your signature line begin? Is there a difference?

The above questions are rhetorical. I'm just thinking "wtf" to myself, as I am want to do...
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
davestoller said:
Who the hell believes that anyway? I ride with some guys who used to race pro...even if they train some year round and then ramp it up in the summer, they come NOWHERE close to their former powers, and these are professional sports trainers now.

In the same speech he said he is still as fat as ever. Which I am assuming means he is not training seriously or riding very much.
So how would his power reach anywhere NEAR what he did as a pro when he trained and raced 9 months a year. In the pro peloton?
He is so full of it. So why then did he SAY it?

Recall, its been twenty years with no high level competition for Greg and he can get HIS power back but Lance is struggling to make it back.
But oh of course, THAT is the point isnt it.
Greg miracle man can come back at age 50 to the same power he had when he raced 20 yearts ago, but Lance at age 38 or 39 out of racing only three years wont get those same power levels back because he was doped back then and cant dope now because of all the tests.

Oh I get it Greg. Thanks for being so subtle. And being si completely off your rocker and full of it.
Zero credibility right now Greg. Zero.

I wouldnt say there's much of a natural drop off in power with age, as long as the person keeps riding or racing. I have teamates that can still hit it close but not quite what they could at their peak. If the rider was an un-stoppable maching at 30 they will still be a really good rider at 50. Seriously. It will certainly drop some by 50, but not a whole heckuva lot.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
tifosa said:
Dude, where does you post end, and your signature line begin? Is there a difference?

The above questions are rhetorical. I'm just thinking "wtf" to myself, as I am want to do...
:)..........
 
Apr 24, 2009
206
0
0
Visit site
elapid said:
Disagree. We need someone like Lemond who can speak from a position of authority. The pot needs stirring. The UCI are useless. Doping has continued relatively unabated. Lemond has solutions and is not afraid to express his opinion. Being a TdF winner allows him to be heard and listened to, compared to most others who would just be ignored. His views and opinions are in accordance with many on this forum, the fans of professional cycling who care about the image of the sport they love: power testing, sack the UCI, etc, etc.

I don't know that Lemond speaks from a "position of authority". I would doubt that he has much influence at all within the official cycling world. I became of fan of professional cycling because of Lemond, I have an autographed picture on my office bulletin board (between Dave Alvin and Guy Tesseron)--I'll always be a fan of his cycling performances, but I think he was described in 1986 as "emotionally fragile" by some of his La Vie Claire teammates, and I think that still holds true today.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Azdak6 said:
I don't know that Lemond speaks from a "position of authority". I would doubt that he has much influence at all within the official cycling world. I became of fan of professional cycling because of Lemond, I have an autographed picture on my office bulletin board (between Dave Alvin and Guy Tesseron)--I'll always be a fan of his cycling performances, but I think he was described in 1986 as "emotionally fragile" by some of his La Vie Claire teammates, and I think that still holds true today.

Your right I think he's overly idealistic, and he actually thinks he can crack the sport (Omerta) with all these subtle actions. Clearly no one (managers, doctors, riders) give much of a crap. Garmin is doping more heavily than almost all of the teams IMO.
 
grimpeur said:
I think what's is going on is that Lemond wants the omerta cracked—broken open, regardless of anyone's record or past. The LA "haters" want the same thing. The Armstrong supporters have no problem with "business as usual" and don't think an omerta exists nor that LA is part of one. And if LA is part of one, so what, that's cycling. You're ruining our hero worship.
+ ten freekin million!
 
Apr 21, 2009
174
0
0
Visit site
EPO, blood packing, Lemond and King Lance

If I have my facts right, EPO as the brand name Epogen didn't get FDA approval until 1989. But it *could* have been manufactured as early as late 1985 or 1986.

Let's not forget, however, that while it is more difficult, risky, and time consuming, homologous blood doping is, in principle, totally undetectable. That is, assuming one keeps the platelet count within reasonable bounds.

Both methods were certainly not detectable in the 80's.

Does this mean Lemond doped?

Having had some very illuminating conversations with college football and NFL trainers, there appears to be a strict code of silence about doping within many sports, including cycling. It is rare that anyone will speak openly about doping. So while it is entirely possible that Lemond may have doped and may just be covering his a**, in the interest of openness we need to welcome his verbosity on the subject.

King Lance's actions, particularly his toward Simeoni, are clearly consistent with enforcing this "code of silence".
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Seth Bullock said:
Well they should get some better gear then because it doesn't seem to be working.

Seth,their riding the Tour. If they were clean most of their team would DNF and at best somebody might get top 50-75.

They blood dope big time...Millar has worked with Dr. Chechini, Vande Velde rode with Lance for years and years, Vaughters rode with Lance, the list goes on and on... zabriskie beat Lance in the opening TT 2005! They finished almost 1st in the TTT (the team time trial)... The TTT is all aerobic capacity power and or FTP (all out 1hr power)... 750cc frozen packed red cells for each rider that day.

You wouldnt be competitive overall in the Tour without autologous blood doping and HGH, insulin... They dont have a Tour winner but that doesnt mean their not top 10.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
kukiniloa said:
If I have my facts right, EPO as the brand name Epogen didn't get FDA approval until 1989. But it *could* have been manufactured as early as late 1985 or 1986.

Let's not forget, however, that while it is more difficult, risky, and time consuming, homologous blood doping is, in principle, totally undetectable. That is, assuming one keeps the platelet count within reasonable bounds.

Both methods were certainly not detectable in the 80's.

Does this mean Lemond doped?

Having had some very illuminating conversations with college football and NFL trainers, there appears to be a strict code of silence about doping within many sports, including cycling. It is rare that anyone will speak openly about doping. So while it is entirely possible that Lemond may have doped and may just be covering his a**, in the interest of openness we need to welcome his verbosity on the subject.

King Lance's actions, particularly his toward Simeoni, are clearly consistent with enforcing this "code of silence".

Personally I dont believe Lemond blood doped or used epo... No doubt Moser was blood doped for his hour record. But in Pro Cycling I just dont believe it had caughten on yet... It actually takes a fair amount of knowledge and a good physician in charge to homologous blood dope. There needs to be cross checks, the blood needs to be kept cool if its whole blood and cant be kept out longer than 15 mins... Transporting from stage to stage would have been complicated too.

You have to look at that first epo Tour of 91... Lemond and Fingon both blazed the 1990 Tour and Lemond was in even better shape for 1991.. And he got his **** handed to him big time by 5 riders that were clearly on epo that year. The next year he just DNFd. I think for certain he didnt jack his crit.
 
Jun 13, 2009
99
0
0
Visit site
BigBoat said:
Seth...their riding the Tour........... ....... They dont have a Tour winner but that doesnt mean their not top 10.

If they were all going to the tour = they're going to the tour

If they were trying to win the TTT = their aim is to win the TTT

If they're going over to compete = They're going over there to compete

That's all ... keep up the good work :)
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
subzro said:
If they were all going to the tour = they're going to the tour

If they were trying to win the TTT = their aim is to win the TTT

If they're going over to compete = They're going over there to compete

That's all ... keep up the good work :)

hehe, I find it incredible how people blindly believe.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
kukiniloa said:
If I have my facts right, EPO as the brand name Epogen didn't get FDA approval until 1989. But it *could* have been manufactured as early as late 1985 or 1986.

QUOTE]

epo certainly was not mass manufactured until 89...but it existed experimentally earlier on. "Goldwasser and Kung began work to purify human Epo, and managed to purify 10 ml by 1977."

I do not think though, that epo was used in the Tour until atleast 90...And not a significant number were on it until 91.