Armstrong vs LeMond



danfoz

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

This is the type of information I was asking for, thanks danfoz.
No prob. It should be noted I erroneously stated what was claimed to be fact. The claim is that Lemonds VO2max is the highest recorded/calculated, Lemond's claim in fact - not that he claimed to have the highest, but he claimed to be in the 94-95 range, which would indeed put him as one of the highest, if not the highest cyclists measured.

However anyone taking a look at the 89 TDF closing TT can easily see that one rider looks like a missile and one rider looks like a parachute. Judging by the width of his bullhorns Fignon may have had one of those coaches who believed wider is better because "it opens up the breathing" without understanding the full implication of the aerodynamics. Pure speculation on my part. But Fignon's arms are straight and not bent (therefore not eliminating the forearm from the wind), and frontally viewed they actually fall outside his body sillhouette. It's an aerodynamic nightmare by current standards. In contrast, Lemond's position is pretty similar to riders today. It's hard to believe folks are still questioning this performance and rationalizing the result as "proof" that Lemond doped.
 

jpwkeeper

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


No prob. It should be noted I erroneously stated what was claimed to be fact. The claim is that Lemonds VO2max is the highest recorded/calculated, Lemond's claim in fact - not that he claimed to have the highest, but he claimed to be in the 94-95 range, which would indeed put him as one of the highest, if not the highest cyclists measured.

However anyone taking a look at the 89 TDF closing TT can easily see that one rider looks like a missile and one rider looks like a parachute. Judging by the width of his bullhorns Fignon may have had one of those coaches who believed wider is better because "it opens up the breathing" without understanding the full implication of the aerodynamics. Pure speculation on my part. But Fignon's arms are straight and not bent (therefore not eliminating the forearm from the wind), and frontally viewed they actually fall outside his body sillhouette. It's an aerodynamic nightmare by current standards. In contrast, Lemond's position is pretty similar to riders today. It's hard to believe folks are still questioning this performance and rationalizing the result as "proof" that Lemond doped.
It's not that LeMond smoked Fignon that makes it suspicious, it's that 23 years later the record still stands as the fastest TT ever despite advances in tech and training. It's definitely not proof, it only raises questions. Really, at this point any single day "amazing" ride raises suspicions for me, but suspicion is not accusation.
 

danfoz

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

Really, at this point any single day "amazing" ride raises suspicions for me, but suspicion is not accusation.
Philippe Gilbert, one of my favorite riders, a stunning CV of single day amazing rides, possibly the best season (2011) of single day victories in the modern era of any rider. This guy must raise more alarm bells than a chili tasting contest. Seems at this point we may never know for sure about Lemond. But as with any rider, I hold my judgement till the evidence is undeniable, and until that time just enjoy the action.
 

limerickman

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


Philippe Gilbert, one of my favorite riders, a stunning CV of single day amazing rides, possibly the best season (2011) of single day victories in the modern era of any rider. This guy must raise more alarm bells than a chili tasting contest.
Gilbert's 2011 season reminded me of David Rebellin's 2004 season /img/vbsmilies/smilies/redface.gif
 

britbox

New Member
Jul 28, 2006
8
2
0
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?
Physiologically there hasn't been a cyclist approaching Lemond's genetics in the last 23 years. 92.5 VOMax. Indurain was about the closest at 88. So maybe it's not so difficult to figure after all. It's also common knowledge Lemond was pretty far advanced regarding technology and training methods. If I recall correctly - even on that stage, some in the Fignon camp weren't happy about Lemond's tri handlebars and didn't want him using them.

So it's not inexplicable and it wasn't out of the blue either - Lemond was a great time trialler from juniors up.
 

jpwkeeper

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


Physiologically there hasn't been a cyclist approaching Lemond's genetics in the last 23 years. 92.5 VOMax. Indurain was about the closest at 88. So maybe it's not so difficult to figure after all. It's also common knowledge Lemond was pretty far advanced regarding technology and training methods. If I recall correctly - even on that stage, some in the Fignon camp weren't happy about Lemond's tri handlebars and didn't want him using them.

So it's not inexplicable and it wasn't out of the blue either - Lemond was a great time trialler from juniors up.
Wouldn't doping, especially something like EPO, influence a VO2Max test?

As for the tech, remember I'm not comparing Greg's against Fignon's, I'm comparing Greg's against today's time trial specialists, like Cancellara. Was Greg's superior to Fabian's? Did some things Greg used that day get outlawed over time? It's possible, since the regulations have changed since then, but I'd be interested in specifics.

Before anger posts, remember I'm basically trying to keep the conversation honest.
 

slovakguy

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


Wouldn't doping, especially something like EPO, influence a VO2Max test?

As for the tech, remember I'm not comparing Greg's against Fignon's, I'm comparing Greg's against today's time trial specialists, like Cancellara. Was Greg's superior to Fabian's? Did some things Greg used that day get outlawed over time? It's possible, since the regulations have changed since then, but I'd be interested in specifics.

Before anger posts, remember I'm basically trying to keep the conversation honest.
in comparing the time trial in which lemond bettered fignon to any of the time trials which followed, you might not be comparing apples to oranges, but mandarin oranges to valencia oranges. i don't believe the aso have set up a parcours like that final stage since where gradient and length would allow comparison over the full course. you might be better served by focusing on smaller segments of that race, gleaning kph on a particular gradient at a particular point in the trial (since effort will flag over the course) and trying to find similar conditions as ridden over the years. and remember that fignon wasn't that far off lemond's time at the finish.
 

slovakguy

Well-Known Member
Mar 17, 2006
1,898
66
0
are you insinuating lemond doped or are you just doing what you always do--post information most of us learned long ago? jeez, bobbo, coulter has a bigger set than you do--at least she says stupid stuff openly.
 

alienator

Well-Known Member
Jun 10, 2004
12,596
310
0
slovakguy said:
are you insinuating lemond doped or are you just doing what you always do--post information most of us learned long ago?  jeez, bobbo, coulter has a bigger set than you do--at least she says stupid stuff openly.
No matter how you cut it, Lemond did have to work hard to beat Fignon. If you took Lemond's aero bars and aero helmet away, it would have been a pretty narrow victory. Fignon was no push over.
 

britbox

New Member
Jul 28, 2006
8
2
0
Originally Posted by slovakguy .

in comparing the time trial in which lemond bettered fignon to any of the time trials which followed, you might not be comparing apples to oranges, but mandarin oranges to valencia oranges. i don't believe the aso have set up a parcours like that final stage since where gradient and length would allow comparison over the full course. you might be better served by focusing on smaller segments of that race, gleaning kph on a particular gradient at a particular point in the trial (since effort will flag over the course) and trying to find similar conditions as ridden over the years. and remember that fignon wasn't that far off lemond's time at the finish.
This.

and others rode great times that day - the course had a downhill gradient for segments and there was a tailwind.
 

parkansas

New Member
Sep 5, 2012
11
0
0
This is just another example of someone with no understanding of cycling. It actually shows that the less you know about cycling, the louder you have to shout about it. Dr. Ferrari was a cancer on cycling, and Greg knew that any one he worked with was there to cheat. It's that simple. I doubt LeMond gives a rats ass about your opinion, Bryan. You've been proven wrong because you're a moron. Go back to your gay **** sites.
 

mpre53

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2013
1,098
179
48
69
Cape Cod, MA, USA
Originally Posted by danfoz

However anyone taking a look at the 89 TDF closing TT can easily see that one rider looks like a missile and one rider looks like a parachute. Judging by the width of his bullhorns Fignon may have had one of those coaches who believed wider is better because "it opens up the breathing" without understanding the full implication of the aerodynamics. Pure speculation on my part. But Fignon's arms are straight and not bent (therefore not eliminating the forearm from the wind), and frontally viewed they actually fall outside his body sillhouette. It's an aerodynamic nightmare by current standards. In contrast, Lemond's position is pretty similar to riders today. It's hard to believe folks are still questioning this performance and rationalizing the result as "proof" that Lemond doped.
Pssst---it was the ponytail.
big-smile.png


Case closed. We can put this thread to bed for another two years.
 

Colnago62

New Member
Nov 24, 2011
95
4
0
LeMond's body was built for cycling. Very durable knees and his ability to ride with super low bars and stem and be comfortable and able to to breathe. To think he wanted to be a downhill skier.
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
I remember at the time not being a LeMond fan.

I admired his ability but he was the first of the really great riders not to ride February-October.
The previous great champions all rode throughout the season, whereas LeMond was the first to be more selective in the races that he rode, and as a fan I didn't like that.
LeMond probably helped instigate the introduction of more money in to the sport as well.

Besides he beat Sean kelly at Chamberey in 1989, that in itself merited my dislike.

It was interesting listening to Greg talking on Eurosport this year as a summariser.
On stage 5 of this years TDF, Paris-Roubaix stage, he talked about racing PR and his reflections were very interesting.
He was never a particular fan of the Classic races as he admitted but he said that he had to ride them because he knew that if he didn't ride those races, he would be too long retired to deal with "I wonder how I would have done if I had ridden those races..........."
 

mpre53

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2013
1,098
179
48
69
Cape Cod, MA, USA
LeMond didn't have any real weaknesses as a rider. Except maybe his fondness for turkey hunting. But if there ever was a thing as a sore winner, it was him in 1986. Even if you felt like you were blind sided and back stabbed, be gracious in victory. Don't whine about it.
 

danfoz

Well-Known Member
Apr 12, 2011
2,432
184
48
Originally Posted by mpre53

LeMond didn't have any real weaknesses as a rider. Except maybe his fondness for turkey hunting.

But if there ever was a thing as a sore winner, it was him in 1986. Even if you felt like you were blind sided and back stabbed, be gracious in victory. Don't whine about it.
Wassa matter for you, turkeys are delicious!

I agree with the part about being a sore winner though. Unfortunately despite being a huge Hinault fan (even as an American), I have to say it pained me to watch his disingenuous celebratory finish salutation with Lemond at the top of Alpe D'Huez that year. Anyone watching could tell it pained him greatly to relegate the throne to an American, despite promising otherwise the previous year, and in that moment Lemond proved to be the bigger man letting Hinault cross the line first. However Hinault is still first in my book, apparently being the only pro cyclist who actually knows how to throw a decent punch!
 

oldbobcat

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

I agree with the part about being a sore winner though. Unfortunately despite being a huge Hinault fan (even as an American), I have to say it pained me to watch his disingenuous celebratory finish salutation with Lemond at the top of Alpe D'Huez that year. Anyone watching could tell it pained him greatly to relegate the throne to an American, despite promising otherwise the previous year, and in that moment Lemond proved to be the bigger man letting Hinault cross the line first. However Hinault is still first in my book, apparently being the only pro cyclist who actually knows how to throw a decent punch!
At the '86 Tour they were both pricks. Greg would have had the high road to himself, though, if he just knew when to stop talking.

Greg's loquaciousness was part of his appeal, though. He thoroughly loved what he was doing, and he loved talking about it, as long as he had his winters off for golf.

His two winning world championship rides sealed my esteem of him as a rider. '83 was a lesson from the master (at 22 years of age) in keeping your powder dry until you need it and then controlling the race from the front. Without teammates. Eddie B. bragged that it was a textbook application of his coaching lessons. And '89 was more tactical, against a stronger field, more spectacular, more improvised, but also brilliant. And without teammates.
 

mpre53

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2013
1,098
179
48
69
Cape Cod, MA, USA
oldbobcat said:
At the '86 Tour they were both pricks. Greg would have had the high road to himself, though, if he just knew when to stop talking. Greg's loquaciousness was part of his appeal, though. He thoroughly loved what he was doing, and he loved talking about it, as long as he had his winters off for golf. His two winning world championship rides sealed my esteem of him as a rider. '83 was a lesson from the master (at 22 years of age) in keeping your powder dry until you need it and then controlling the race from the front. Without teammates. Eddie B. bragged that it was a textbook application of his coaching lessons. And '89 was more tactical, against a stronger field, more spectacular, more improvised, but also brilliant. And without teammates.
If you believe Hampsten, going into the last week, Kocheli was so fed up with the bickering that he told Andy that he didn't give a **** if he went ahead and took the win. :big-smile: