Armstrong vs LeMond



vspa

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2009
2,203
76
0
jpwkeeper said:
So in 1993, LeMond comes out of nowhere, back from a hunting accident, and takes 58 seconds out of the best time trialist in the world on a 25Km course?  OK, he used aerobars and an aero helmet, that makes sense.  However, his average speed has only been bested twice since then, once in a prologue in 94 and once by Zabriskie in 2005 in another time trial, at a time where Z was an admitted doper.  It's suspicious. And before you call me out for basing suspicion on a performance, recall that Greg has recently done exactly that against Contador, so it's his own precedent being followed.
it was 1989, 2 years after the hunting thing, and Fignon wasn't a TT specialist, -------------- after all these years I cannot understand how Lemond was dropped on categories 2. (and even 3.) climbs, having won nothing between 1992 and his retirement (1994 or 1995 i think), im leaning towards a burnout, in his own words he said he couldnt even train for more than one hour at one point, same case with Eugene Berzin, we have to give Armstrong merit on that, he never faded not even after a 3 year hiatus,
 

slovakguy

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2006
1,898
66
0
Originally Posted by jpwkeeper .


The thing that always bothered me about Greg was that, with every truly amazing one day performance in cycling I've ever seen, doping has come to light.

Landis: 1 day solo breakaway. Tested positive for Testosterone.
Hamilton: 1 day solo breakaway. Blood Doping
Pantani: His time up Huez, which he did at the end of a stage, stood pretty much forever and might still stand (I thought one guy beat it, can't remember). I do remember that Lance could not beat the time, juiced as he was, in a time trial (he missed it by 1 second). Pantani wasn't ever caught, but his tragic end kind of speaks for itself.

So in 1993, LeMond comes out of nowhere, back from a hunting accident, and takes 58 seconds out of the best time trialist in the world on a 25Km course? OK, he used aerobars and an aero helmet, that makes sense. However, his average speed has only been bested twice since then, once in a prologue in 94 and once by Zabriskie in 2005 in another time trial, at a time where Z was an admitted doper. It's suspicious.

And before you call me out for basing suspicion on a performance, recall that Greg has recently done exactly that against Contador, so it's his own precedent being followed.
casting aspersions on lemond's performance in the giro and then his tdf victory later and yet you won't raise an eyebrow concerning armstrong's performance in 1999's tdf? come back from cancer and in his first season back in the peloton, noticeable bruise on his shoulder, wins the prologue, tests positive for steroids, has a back-dated t u e, wins in a walk on sestrieres, willfully pulled in his reins on huez, and you only need the "looks on the faces" of those little shavers! forgive me, sir, but may i call "********" on your position?
 

Cipher

New Member
Sep 7, 2002
782
2
18
Originally Posted by alienator .


LeMond didn't know he was right before the USADA investigation and decision. LeMond only thought that he was right. Guessing an answer doesn't mean you have the knowledge. Further, for all we know, LeMond could have been a doper, too. After all, on 3 occasions he did win the TdF, beating some possible winners who were doping. Someone could easily say that LeMond "doth protest too much" and make assumptions based on that.
I lost respect for LeMond because of his single minded focus on one rider, not because of his stance and passion about ridding the peloton of doping. I couldn't care less about Armstrong and LeMond having it in for Armstrong. It's just that all his bleating about Armstrong was wasted energy that could have been spent fighting against doping on the larger scale. I think it kept him from seeing what he could do and the message he could get out. Alas, LeMond sure doesn't seem to have the same dogged pursuit of all dopers as he did with trying to our Armstrong.
Truly unbelievable! How can one come up with such dribble...
 
  • Like
Reactions: tonyzackery

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
Originally Posted by alienator .


LeMond didn't know he was right before the USADA investigation and decision. LeMond only thought that he was right. Guessing an answer doesn't mean you have the knowledge. Further, for all we know, LeMond could have been a doper, too. After all, on 3 occasions he did win the TdF, beating some possible winners who were doping. Someone could easily say that LeMond "doth protest too much" and make assumptions based on that.
I lost respect for LeMond because of his single minded focus on one rider, not because of his stance and passion about ridding the peloton of doping. I couldn't care less about Armstrong and LeMond having it in for Armstrong. It's just that all his bleating about Armstrong was wasted energy that could have been spent fighting against doping on the larger scale. I think it kept him from seeing what he could do and the message he could get out. Alas, LeMond sure doesn't seem to have the same dogged pursuit of all dopers as he did with trying to our Armstrong.

I think when Armstrong said during that infamous that he could "get plenty of people to claim that LeMond had doped" that LeMond quite rightly realised what sort of lying fraud Armstrong is.

http://veloptimum.net/velonouvelles/10/ART/7juil/NYDailyNews17.htm

There is no level that the Texan Uniballer will try to stoop to.

And for a person who claims to be well educated I am surprised that you buy the Texan Uniballer lies.
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
limerickman said:
I think when Armstrong said during that infamous that he could "get plenty of people to claim that LeMond had doped" that LeMond quite rightly realised what sort of lying fraud Armstrong is. http://veloptimum.net/velonouvelles/10/ART/7juil/NYDailyNews17.htm There is no level that the Texan Uniballer will try to stoop to. And for a person who claims to be well educated I am surprised that you buy the Texan Uniballer lies.
I don't believe his lies. I just don't have any reason to believe LeMond either. I never said or indicated that I believe what Armstrong said.
 

oldbobcat

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2003
3,233
194
48
70
Originally Posted by alienator .


I don't believe his lies. I just don't have any reason to believe LeMond either. I never said or indicated that I believe what Armstrong said.
A most reasonable position to take.
 

jpwkeeper

Member
Jul 25, 2004
375
20
18
Originally Posted by slovakguy .

casting aspersions on lemond's performance in the giro and then his tdf victory later and yet you won't raise an eyebrow concerning armstrong's performance in 1999's tdf? come back from cancer and in his first season back in the peloton, noticeable bruise on his shoulder, wins the prologue, tests positive for steroids, has a back-dated t u e, wins in a walk on sestrieres, willfully pulled in his reins on huez, and you only need the "looks on the faces" of those little shavers! forgive me, sir, but may i call "********" on your position?
I never said Lance didn't dope; in fact I think it's pretty much established that he did. But there was no one huge unreal performance, it was more a body of work. My post wasn't about Lance, it was about Greg.
 

jpwkeeper

Member
Jul 25, 2004
375
20
18
Originally Posted by parkansas .

It might help if some of you just gave up on your little "bromance with Lance," quit trying to say Armstrong's cheating was in some way LeMond's doing, and accept that Armstrong perpetrated one of the greatest frauds in the history of sports. There's no reason Lance can't redeem himsef in the eyes of many people by doing just what he's doing-working with the cancer community and raising his children.
It might help if you stopped making this about Lance. I'm talking about Greg, and whether he was clean, and honestly I don't see how the two are related in any way, shape, or form.

So to be clear:

1. I'm not asserting that Lance didn't dope.
2. I'm not asserting that Greg did.
3. I'm not asserting that Greg influenced Lance's doping.
4. I'm not asserting that Lance influenced Greg in either doping or riding clean
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
parkansas said:
It might help if some of you just gave up on your little "bromance with Lance," quit trying to say Armstrong's cheating was in some way LeMond's doing, and accept that Armstrong perpetrated one of the greatest frauds in the history of sports. There's no reason Lance can't redeem himsef in the eyes of many people by doing just what he's doing-working with the cancer community and raising his children.
Uhm, you've made a very serious reading and/or comprehension error of you think anyone Armstrong's cheating had anything to do with LeMond. In fact, outside of this thread LeMond has only been mentioned rarely in the threads resulting from USADA's findings. As for this thread, it can certainly be justified to have some question about LeMond's claims to doping given the era in which he rode and won the the TdF.
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
Originally Posted by jpwkeeper .



1. I'm not asserting that Lance didn't dope.
2. I'm not asserting that Greg did.
3. I'm not asserting that Greg influenced Lance's doping.
4. I'm not asserting that Lance influenced Greg in either doping or riding clean
tell us what you are asserting.

for a change.
 

jpwkeeper

Member
Jul 25, 2004
375
20
18
Originally Posted by limerickman .


tell us what you are asserting.

for a change.
I'm not Asserting, I'm Questioning. I'll repeat the question.

Given that in nearly every extraordinary single-day performance in cycling (see previous posts for examples) involved doping, the fact that Greg's out-of-the-blue record breaking time trial, a record that still stands today (or close to it) even given advances in technology and training and through the era of rampant doping, does that imply that Greg may not have been as clean as he claims?

If not, how would you explain it?
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
Originally Posted by jpwkeeper .

I'm not Asserting, I'm Questioning. I'll repeat the question.

Given that in nearly every extraordinary single-day performance in cycling (see previous posts for examples) involved doping, the fact that Greg's out-of-the-blue record breaking time trial, a record that still stands today (or close to it) even given advances in technology and training and through the era of rampant doping, does that imply that Greg may not have been as clean as he claims?

If not, how would you explain it?
ah, you're only questioning. I see.

Tis only the disaffected CF Armstrong fans that are questioning clean rider's records.
That's what you're reduced to.
 

jpwkeeper

Member
Jul 25, 2004
375
20
18
Originally Posted by limerickman .


ah, you're only questioning. I see.

Tis only the disaffected CF Armstrong fans that are questioning clean rider's records.
That's what you're reduced to.
I...Think...You may have indirectly called Alienator a disaffect CF Armstrong Fan. Ouch.

So, do you have an answer?
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
Originally Posted by jpwkeeper .

I...Think...You may have indirectly called Alienator a disaffect CF Armstrong Fan. Ouch.

So, do you have an answer?
Naw, if that was the case I would have replied to Alienator.
And not you.

You're reduced to accusing clean riders without an ounce of corroborative evidence of doping, here on CF.
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
jpwkeeper said:
I...Think...You may have indirectly called Alienator a disaffect CF Armstrong Fan.  Ouch. So, do you have an answer?
For what? I'm not a disaffected Armstrong fan, and I have no idea what CF means. I'm just skeptical, and my skepticism is of the rational or scientific sort, not the blinders on doubting kind(they're the same thing). When LeMond was winning TdF's, doping was in play in the peloton so skepticism is warranted. Skepticism abates in the face of facts or proof. Being skeptical doesn't mean I didn't enjoy watching LeMond win. Many riders have claimed to be clean, and many of those riders have ended up being caught doping. I don't know LeMond, and haven't spent personal time with him, so I've nothing to base any definitive character assumptions on. I've not spent time with anyone on the ProTour. I haven't had any personal time with them, so in the same fashion I cannot make definitive character judgements about them either. Armstrong and LeMond are the topics of this thread, so it's expected that people would express a spectrum of thoughts or beliefs about either of the two. Logically the argument that people that don't have full faith in LeMond are disaffected Armstrong lovers fails. The opinion someone holds of someone else, in this case, LeMond isn't something that is necessarily binary in origin, as in you are either you trust LeMond or you're a disaffected Armstrong lover. That's not a logical conclusion.
 

vspa

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2009
2,203
76
0
jpwkeeper said:
I'm not Asserting, I'm Questioning.  I'll repeat the question. Given that in nearly every extraordinary single-day performance in cycling (see previous posts for examples) involved doping, the fact that Greg's out-of-the-blue record breaking time trial, a record that still stands today (or close to it) even given advances in technology and training and through the era of rampant doping, does that imply that Greg may not have been as clean as he claims? If not, how would you explain it?  
leave alone the 89 tour... it was one of the best sporting battles on any sport in that era,
 

CAMPYBOB

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
11,945
2,086
113
Fignon admitted the use of amphetamines and cortisone. RIP, LPF. Another great rider.
 

OTownRaider

New Member
Oct 18, 2012
23
2
0
It's just so sad. The allegations against any cyclist do not tarnish the accomplishments in my eyes.
 

danfoz

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
2,432
184
48
Originally Posted by jpwkeeper .

I'm not Asserting, I'm Questioning. I'll repeat the question.

Given that in nearly every extraordinary single-day performance in cycling (see previous posts for examples) involved doping, the fact that Greg's out-of-the-blue record breaking time trial, a record that still stands today (or close to it) even given advances in technology and training and through the era of rampant doping, does that imply that Greg may not have been as clean as he claims?

If not, how would you explain it?
There is the possibility that having the highest ever recorded VO2max, in fact quite a bit higher than Lancer's, and the fact that he used the three pieces of aero equipment the count the most: helmet, bars and wheels, attributed to his performance. It's also possible that the marketing departments of various cycling manufacturers have embelished the actual benefit of the technological advances over the years. I'm not saying Lemond was clean, but imo his performance was not neccesarily a stretch given the available factors.
 

jpwkeeper

Member
Jul 25, 2004
375
20
18
Originally Posted by danfoz .


There is the possibility that having the highest ever recorded VO2max, in fact quite a bit higher than Lancer's, and the fact that he used the three pieces of aero equipment the count the most: helmet, bars and wheels, attributed to his performance. It's also possible that the marketing departments of various cycling manufacturers have embelished the actual benefit of the technological advances over the years. I'm not saying Lemond was clean, but imo his performance was not neccesarily a stretch given the available factors.
This is the type of information I was asking for, thanks danfoz.