• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. 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 16 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
Visit site
Big Boat according to you everyone is doped to the eyeballs (sorry except Lemond) therefore there is no problem as it is now a level playing field, I hate to say this as I am a newby on the site (though certainly not to cycling!) but you really are full of S**t, they say that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and in your case it is seriously dangerous and if I where a team rider (millar et al ) and someone passed your comments on here to me then I would probably take things further. I for one have decided to stop all of this doping talk as this forum is now just about doping and every thread seems to come back to the same point ....often it is you that brings it back here.

Try talking about something else and actually get out on your bike ... I have a picture of you as some fat geek that copies and pastes any bit of repetitive data after trawling web sites and the only bike you ride is an old raleigh shopper with a basket on the front to pick the shopping up for your old mum !!!

Just joking !!!
 
Apr 8, 2009
272
0
0
Visit site
BigBoat said:
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.

You seem to have conveniently forgotten that the 1984 US team reportedly blood doped (the year Grewal won the olympic RR) This reputedly involved Mike Fraysse who worked with Lemond amongst others. Follow the logic if you choose, but blood doping was available and practised.
 
davidg said:
You seem to have conveniently forgotten that the 1984 US team reportedly blood doped (the year Grewal won the olympic RR) This reputedly involved Mike Fraysse who worked with Lemond amongst others. Follow the logic if you choose, but blood doping was available and practised.
I need to learn more since this could be new. So you believe that not only Greg Lemmond, but a lot of other riders were blood doping in the 80's Tour de France? Otherwise why bring it up? Do you have any sort of sources? (Like anybody that rode in the 80's like Fignon, Herrera, Millar, etc. that have confessed to blood doping, not amphetamines).
 
Jun 24, 2009
22
0
0
Visit site
I agree with the message; the delivery has to be more believable

Tapeworm said:
Why are we all so certain that Lemond was clean as well. Are we to believe you are a doper to win 7 tours but not 3?

I think this is more spin, just a different way. Armstrong has built his "legend" is this just Lemond's version?

You got it. LeMond knows full well there is no blood of his lying around waiting for more testing. He can lip off all he wants. It still seems to me he just can't stand it that he doesn't get any limelight. Don't take that to mean I don't like him or hate Armstrong. Both of them have a lot of value ... in massively different ways.

The LeWedge is a great thing; have them on my shoes.

Made nice bikes; have a Rennes TT bike in the garage.

Where is the focus on the positive aspects of those and pushing the brand? I have been reading everything cycling I could get hold of for 15-20 years and I haven't seen the positive management of his brand at all, let alone on a par with the Armstrong marketing machine. (That is an interesting thread topic unto itself, but what is clear is that I am never going to be so stupid as to start an "Armstrong thread" in this forum; I can't take all the bile that generates.)

By giving these speeches the way he does it just doesn't work in the end. There needs to be a focus on the system and not the individuals. Attacking Armstrong galvanizes just about everyone for no purpose.
 
Jun 24, 2009
22
0
0
Visit site
BigBoat said:
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.

I think I read somebody else saying this, but:
- where is the evidence of that?
- do you think you are **** Cheney and can just state things and that makes them true?
- what does that moronic statement have to do with the Greg LeMond speech?

Why can't any thread in this forum stay on the f---ing topic?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
EricBikeCO said:
I think I read somebody else saying this, but:
- where is the evidence of that?
- do you think you are **** Cheney and can just state things and that makes them true?
- what does that moronic statement have to do with the Greg LeMond speech?

Why can't any thread in this forum stay on the f---ing topic?

pay him no mind.

he's not big on evidence.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
EricBikeCO said:
I think I read somebody else saying this, but:
- where is the evidence of that?
- do you think you are **** Cheney and can just state things and that makes them true?
- what does that moronic statement have to do with the Greg LeMond speech?

Why can't any thread in this forum stay on the f---ing topic?

Maybe you need to look into a mirror and ask this question?
 
Apr 21, 2009
174
0
0
Visit site
What you so-called "haters" are saying is...

Let me get this straight. Those of you who are saying that everybody is doped "to the eyeballs" mean that - guys with the bucks and the resources who can afford the good doctors can engage in auto/homo-logous blood doping.

CERA/EPO are for the guys who don't have the resources, and are willing to risk detection.

RIGHT?!


I would also like to point out that total hemoglobin mass is ONLY effective is a baseline for every athlete is established over time, meaning many measurements per year over years.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
kukiniloa said:
Let me get this straight. Those of you who are saying that everybody is doped "to the eyeballs" mean that - guys with the bucks and the resources who can afford the good doctors can engage in auto/homo-logous blood doping.
.

They can only autologous blood dope (with their own blood.) If they blood doped with somebody else's blood (homologous transfusion) they'd be caught with someone else's blood.

CERA/EPO are for the guys who don't have the resources, and are willing to risk detection.

When you take blood transfusions for any extended time your body's natural red cell production shuts down. The testing sees this. So the rider IV dose tiny, tiny amounts of epo to stimulate normal rectics (baby red cells.) Sometimes they then test positive for epo. But there is a method now that allows somebody to store and preserve their blood so rectics dont die off. This is where the knowledge, money, connections come in.

Perhaps only the top 50 guys are autologous blood doping...maybe more. Yes its still possible to keep a "naturally high" crit with epo. Upper 40s maybe.

I would also like to point out that total hemoglobin mass is ONLY effective is a baseline for every athlete is established over time, meaning many measurements per year over years.

The mean corpuscular hemoglobin, or "mean cell hemoglobin" (MCH), is the average mass of hemoglobin per red blood cell in a sample of blood.

I've been talking about total body hemoglobin testing (total red cell volume.) You wouldnt be looking for norms, but looking for shifts in total body hemoglobin.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Why can't any thread in this forum stay on the f---ing topic?

Thoughtforfood said:
Maybe you need to look into a mirror and ask this question?

Yeah...Its not a boxing ring but a message board. :)

The topic is about Lemond and Lance since Lemond talked about Lance, doping, corruption, etc, etc.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
davidg said:
You seem to have conveniently forgotten that the 1984 US team reportedly blood doped (the year Grewal won the olympic RR) This reputedly involved Mike Fraysse who worked with Lemond amongst others. Follow the logic if you choose, but blood doping was available and practised.

Yeah, they could actually blood dope at early as 1970s. I dont think red cell jacking caught on though until epo came out. They didnt understand that it made a big diff yet. You have to look at estimates of power from that early era (1986), and quotes from riders about the time when epo came out (early 90s.) If Lemond had used epo or blood doped for his Tour wins he probably would have dominated by 20+ minutes. Maybe even more than that.
 
Mar 19, 2009
832
0
0
Visit site
Alpe d'Huez said:
The first reports of blood packing I heard of was from leaks at the 1976 Olympics, mostly at Waldemir Cirpinski, marathoner who came out of nowhere to beat Frank Shorter.

Not the Americans were doping, they were using steroids maybe twenty years before that.
I've read papers on the history of blood doping which mentioned cyclists in the 1960s and Anquetil in particular as using transfusions.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Epicycle said:
I've read papers on the history of blood doping which mentioned cyclists in the 1960s and Anquetil in particular as using transfusions.
Not succesfully jacking their crits... If he would have jacked his hematocrit he would have easily won his Tours by 30 mins... I remember reading something like that too in the TDF centenial book 2003. They had the right idea though.
 
Apr 8, 2009
272
0
0
Visit site
Escarabajo said:
I need to learn more since this could be new. So you believe that not only Greg Lemmond, but a lot of other riders were blood doping in the 80's Tour de France? Otherwise why bring it up? Do you have any sort of sources? (Like anybody that rode in the 80's like Fignon, Herrera, Millar, etc. that have confessed to blood doping, not amphetamines).

by BigBoat -"But in Pro Cycling I just dont believe it had caughten on yet..."
You have made a big leap from my post here. I am not suggesting anyone was blood doping, my post was worded quite carefully. In answer to BB's statement above, I merely observed that blood doping was available much earlier, and was used by the USA at the 1984 Olympics by their own admission - (Eddie B). It was well known in the 70's (and even 60's according to other posts here)

Lemond makes a big deal about how he was clean and many on this forum support that. On the other side of the coin, many are questioning why he was the only 'clean' rider amongst his peers.

You can draw your own conclusions, but I am of the view that it is naive to suggest he knew nothing about what was going on, given the associates he had at the time.

There are plenty of sources for this if you want to do your own searches.
 
Apr 8, 2009
272
0
0
Visit site
BigBoat said:
Yeah, they could actually blood dope at early as 1970s. I dont think red cell jacking caught on though until epo came out. They didnt understand that it made a big diff yet. You have to look at estimates of power from that early era (1986), and quotes from riders about the time when epo came out (early 90s.) If Lemond had used epo or blood doped for his Tour wins he probably would have dominated by 20+ minutes. Maybe even more than that.

It seems that the techniques were fairly primitive by todays 'standards', but they existed. I am not sure I believe Grewal's assertion that he did not blood dope in the 84 olympics
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
davidg said:
It seems that the techniques were fairly primitive by todays 'standards', but they existed. I am not sure I believe Grewal's assertion that he did not blood dope in the 84 olympics

Were they taking their crits, I dont know. Who knows high they went.. Maybe not higher than 48% if they only took 500cc of whole blood, they certainly didnt realize its potential if they did not jack all the way.... Conconi did though during this time.
 
May 14, 2009
151
0
0
Visit site
Epicycle said:
I've read papers on the history of blood doping which mentioned cyclists in the 1960s and Anquetil in particular as using transfusions.

What kind of transfusions? How were they able to separate blood?
How was blood stored? When was it reinjected?

I never found something in press or magasine supporting that allegation.
 
Jun 26, 2009
269
0
0
Visit site
lets set the record straight

I have just registered on this forum after reading so much trash about what people assume to be happening. I raced as a professional in the 1980s so I speak from personal experience. The first I heard of blood doping in cycling was when i heard about the 1984 US olympic team having transfusions of their own previously stored blood immediately prior to the LA games. At this time it was not illegal in the eyes of the sports governing bodies. At this time doping was much worse than it is now as the kind of substances being used ranged from anabolic steroids to amphetamines and was employed by almost everyone at the elite level. Greg Lemond was a brilliant athlete in his own right but I cannot accept, as he claims, that he was unaware of drug use when he was racing. The testing back then was nowhere near as broad and sophisticated as it is now. When EPO was first used in the 90s it was not on the banned list nor was it tested for. If everyone is using whatever is going around at the time then how is it cheating and until you have competed at an elite level yourself with all the pressures of expectation placed upon you then you have no right to judge the character of someone you have never met personally. And why single out Lance Armstrong?....yes the tall poppy syndrome! Just about every great champion in cycling at any time has been connected to doping in some way or another. It is no worse now than its ever been nor is cycling any worse than other endurance sports. Its just that cycling does more than other sports to get rid of it.
 
Mar 10, 2009
504
0
0
Visit site
beroepsrenner's signature line said:
to have tried and failed is still better than always wishing you had


But the elephant in the room is always there:
To have tired and failed clean?
or
To have tried and failed straight?


I did the latter, at the national level, in women's cycling, just a few years ahead of you. A straight failure, I was. And right proud of that accomplishment, too. ;)
 
beroepsrenner said:
I have just registered on this forum after reading so much trash about what people assume to be happening. I raced as a professional in the 1980s so I speak from personal experience. The first I heard of blood doping in cycling was when i heard about the 1984 US olympic team having transfusions of their own previously stored blood immediately prior to the LA games. At this time it was not illegal in the eyes of the sports governing bodies. At this time doping was much worse than it is now as the kind of substances being used ranged from anabolic steroids to amphetamines and was employed by almost everyone at the elite level. Greg Lemond was a brilliant athlete in his own right but I cannot accept, as he claims, that he was unaware of drug use when he was racing. The testing back then was nowhere near as broad and sophisticated as it is now. When EPO was first used in the 90s it was not on the banned list nor was it tested for. If everyone is using whatever is going around at the time then how is it cheating and until you have competed at an elite level yourself with all the pressures of expectation placed upon you then you have no right to judge the character of someone you have never met personally. And why single out Lance Armstrong?....yes the tall poppy syndrome! Just about every great champion in cycling at any time has been connected to doping in some way or another. It is no worse now than its ever been nor is cycling any worse than other endurance sports. Its just that cycling does more than other sports to get rid of it.

I don't think drug use when you road was any less common than it is today, however the science of doping is better today. As Kohl said he and his manager agreed that it was time to do a serious doping program to go for a podium Tour placing, which he began at the end of the prior season. Such a program involved an Austrian blood lab and a big sum of cash, which for the rider was merely an investment. So if you don't have that kind of cash, then you don't get the best doping which also includes paying the best medic: a Ferrari a Fuentes or whomever.

This is the real injustice. Because doping has become an elitest thing where only the well paid rider can keep up with the Joneses. Fine, you don't want people passing moral judgment (about people they don't even know)...then legalize doping and make it socialized so that we have a level playing field. Because as it is with the current doping system, we have a kind of aristocratic class of rider, whose money renforces his power, and a peon class of rider who may not even get a contract next season. Whereas in terms of people passing moral judgement, look, a pro athlete is a in a privledged world like a politician, so people, who are paying their salaries by buying their sponsors' products, feel they are entitled to pass a moral and character judgment on them in terms of doping. It comes with the territory under such privlidged circumstances. So if you can't stand the heat, then get out of the fire.

As regards to singling out Armstrong, well, he's brought it all upon himself with his megalomania, cynicism and nastyness, for which the Simeoni affair was only the most sensational and publicized portrait of his true persona.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
beroepsrenner said:
I have just registered on this forum after reading so much trash about what people assume to be happening. I raced as a professional in the 1980s so I speak from personal experience. The first I heard of blood doping in cycling was when i heard about the 1984 US olympic team having transfusions of their own previously stored blood immediately prior to the LA games. At this time it was not illegal in the eyes of the sports governing bodies. At this time doping was much worse than it is now as the kind of substances being used ranged from anabolic steroids to amphetamines and was employed by almost everyone at the elite level. Greg Lemond was a brilliant athlete in his own right but I cannot accept, as he claims, that he was unaware of drug use when he was racing. The testing back then was nowhere near as broad and sophisticated as it is now. When EPO was first used in the 90s it was not on the banned list nor was it tested for. If everyone is using whatever is going around at the time then how is it cheating and until you have competed at an elite level yourself with all the pressures of expectation placed upon you then you have no right to judge the character of someone you have never met personally. And why single out Lance Armstrong?....yes the tall poppy syndrome! Just about every great champion in cycling at any time has been connected to doping in some way or another. It is no worse now than its ever been nor is cycling any worse than other endurance sports. Its just that cycling does more than other sports to get rid of it.

Excellent post. Very glad you joined us.

There are some people on here who's specialty is sitting in judgment. Insanely so, and they are relentless.

Do the best you can to pay them no mind and let us here more from you.

Insiders are valued here.
 
Jun 17, 2009
83
0
0
Visit site
Armstrong

Megalomania - Many of the top riders were Megalomaniacs Merckx, Hinault all controlled the peleton and the races and often decided who won and didn't (probably more so than now)

Cynicism - When EVERYONE is trying to find any kind of dirt on you don't you think that you would be cynical

Nastyness - Cycling 'Fans' Spitting on you, death threats !!!, It's F**king tough riding at any level above 'club' and well I think you become jaded with all of it.
 
Mar 10, 2009
51
0
0
Visit site
jackhammer111 said:
Excellent post. Very glad you joined us.

There are some people on here who's specialty is sitting in judgment. Insanely so, and they are relentless.

Do the best you can to pay them no mind and let us here more from you.

Insiders are valued here.


I got into racing in the late 1980's in Dallas when Lance was a pup and racing on the Junior National team. They regularly came to town and destroyed the local talent.

That said, I find the climate on here total bs! If we were to go into the bashers personal histories I can imagine we would find tax cheats, adulterers, pot smokers and any number of other failings amongst them. What in the hell makes you so precocious and holier than thou???

If you have not been there, shut the H*** up.

Stop watching cycling and go watch football, because those guys surely don't use drugs to run full tilt for 90 minutes...right?

As for doping, I have it from 2 former European pros who raced in the late 80s-early 90s and did it on big and small squads that to keep up you used whatever the team gave you...period. Now, back up toe the mid 1960's and the multi time winner of the "Tour of the North", said on many occasions that when he went to France to race all the pros pulled out satchels of drugs, needles, and were injecting each other with whatever was in the bottles. For some reason I cant imagine that was B12.

So long for the glory days and see what you dig up. Todays cycling is far cleaner than it was even 10 years ago.