# LEMOND DOPED! with PROOF!



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

Using the same logic that Lemond likes to puke out as proof of someones' guilt, I say that Lemond Doped. He was no superman that battled his teammate throughout the mountains, because anyone who competes at that level HAS to be doping. He was no superman who set the fastest TT ever because since ALL the pros dope now, some of those super-doped up pros would have smoked his time by now, so he HAD to be doping. I am just so sick of hearing that BITTER, OLD, FAT loudmouth run his trap about something that he has absolutely NO proof about. Greg Lemond, either show some proof or SHUT UP and take your meds.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

cruso414 said:


> Using the same logic that Lemond likes to puke out as proof of someones' guilt, I say that Lemond Doped. He was no superman that battled his teammate throughout the mountains, because anyone who competes at that level HAS to be doping. He was no superman who set the fastest TT ever because since ALL the pros dope now, some of those super-doped up pros would have smoked his time by now, so he HAD to be doping. I am just so sick of hearing that BITTER, OLD, FAT loudmouth run his trap about something that he has absolutely NO proof about. Greg Lemond, either show some proof or SHUT UP and take your meds.


 :Yawn: :Yawn: :Yawn: 

:nono: 

ut: 

Who pooped in your corn flakes this morning dude? 
:frown2:


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

*Lemond*

:idea:


bas said:


> :Yawn: :Yawn: :Yawn:
> 
> :nono:
> 
> ...


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

Cool avatar, but lord almighty, did Greg run over your dog?


----------



## pedalruns (Dec 18, 2002)

cruso414 said:


> Using the same logic that Lemond likes to puke out as proof of someones' guilt, I say that Lemond Doped. He was no superman that battled his teammate throughout the mountains, because anyone who competes at that level HAS to be doping. He was no superman who set the fastest TT ever because since ALL the pros dope now, some of those super-doped up pros would have smoked his time by now, so he HAD to be doping. I am just so sick of hearing that BITTER, OLD, FAT loudmouth run his trap about something that he has absolutely NO proof about. Greg Lemond, either show some proof or SHUT UP and take your meds.



gawd.... HATE is not a pretty thing... I'm sorry for you. Try and have a good day.


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

he woke up an found out that he landed a guy; instead of, a girl last night. it must have been lemonds fault.

FYI: Dave Z. has the fastest TT in a tour.


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

*I am sorry, I should have been clearer*



cocoboots said:


> he woke up an found out that he landed a guy; instead of, a girl last night. it must have been lemonds fault.
> 
> FYI: Dave Z. has the fastest TT in a tour.


I was speaking of Tour de France history. You must have been too mesmerized thinking up that homosexual jab. BTW, married and have 2 kids, you? Does the thought of Greg Lemond conjure up sexual thoughts for you? because I can't see how the rant I originally posted could have lead your mind (or lack of) in such a direction.

Fastest individual time trial: 54.545 kph (Greg LeMond in 1989 over 24.5 km)


----------



## cocoboots (Apr 13, 2006)

fastest individual time trial 54.676 by Dave Z. in the 2005 Tour on stage 1


my post was about as "on target" as your original post. if you feel it is necessary to make up trash about lemond why can't other make up trash about you? if you took personal offense, then i'm sorry. it was meant as a joke.

enjoy your day


----------



## Bocephus Jones II (Oct 7, 2004)

I like PIE!!!!


----------



## MikeBiker (Mar 9, 2003)

Bocephus Jones II said:


> I like PIE!!!!


PIE has been found to be a performance enhancing substance, you doper.


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

*The point I am making is that Greg Lemond*



cocoboots said:


> fastest individual time trial 54.676 by Dave Z. in the 2005 Tour on stage 1
> 
> 
> my post was about as "on target" as your original post. if you feel it is necessary to make up trash about lemond why can't other make up trash about you? if you took personal offense, then i'm sorry. it was meant as a joke.
> ...


is CONSTANTLY attacking one cyclist after another because he is a bitter old man. He has no proof of anything, just speculation and accusations. I am simply using the Lemond method of thinking, only applying it to him. Maybe Lemond has been beaten by Dave Z, but you know as well as I that Dave HAD to be doping to have beaten such a cycling phenom.


----------



## bas (Jul 30, 2004)

cruso414 said:


> is CONSTANTLY attacking one cyclist after another because he is a bitter old man. He has no proof of anything, just speculation and accusations. I am simply using the Lemond method of thinking, only applying it to him. Maybe Lemond has been beaten by Dave Z, but you know as well as I that Dave HAD to be doping to have beaten such a cycling phenom.


You appear to be bitter too.


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

cruso414 said:


> Maybe Lemond has been beaten by Dave Z, but you know as well as I that Dave HAD to be doping to have beaten such a cycling phenom.


Ah, the flawless logic of "if you're fast you're doping." What a super philosphy. 

As this thread is a hate-fest, I like to ADD that I HATE putting CERTAIN words in ALL capitals to EMPHASIZE certain WORDS. It's ridiculous.


----------



## DonkeyMan (Mar 23, 2007)

cruso414 said:


> is CONSTANTLY attacking one cyclist after another because he is a bitter old man. He has no proof of anything, just speculation and accusations. I am simply using the Lemond method of thinking, only applying it to him. Maybe Lemond has been beaten by Dave Z, but you know as well as I that Dave HAD to be doping to have beaten such a cycling phenom.


Actually it wasn't dope, it was tail wind. Well, maybe doped too but we'll never know will we?


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

Hey, don't forget about his second place in Milan-San Remo in 1986, the same year he won the Tour de France. In 1985, he was fourth in Paris-Roubaix, fourth in Het Volk, and second at the Tour de France. What was the comment from the Vaughters-Andreu IM about classics to climber? Hmm. Anyone think Tom Boonen has a chance to win the Tour de France?


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

mohair_chair said:


> Anyone think Tom Boonen has a chance to win the Tour de France?


No way. I think Cycle Sport did an article about Boonen's our chances a while ago in which they compared him to Indurain. Unless Bonnen learns how to TT a million times better and focuses on climbing, he wouldn't stand a chance. He'd pretty much give up his chances in the Classics all the while, which is pretty important in Belgium. Boonen's also said that he would try to do this. I think Hincapie's experiece in the GC scared everyone off.


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

sorry but your own 'logic' doesn't even stand up. Prior to the early 90s, the main PEDs were stimulants, which probably had their effect by altering brain signals that regulate fatigue (see the central governor model of fatigue by Tim Noakes e.g, http://www.news.uct.ac.za/mondaypaper/archives/?id=4523). Cyclists were also taking steroids (e.g,. Roche and Delgado) but this limited in terms of aerobic effects (and besides tended to blow out knees-Roche in 88 for example had to miss the season).

In the early 90s EPO ushered in a new era of PEDS that changes peripheral elements of aeorbic fitness (oxygen carrying capacity of blood). If Lemond was a big doper why did his relative performance decline so dramatically during this period? In 1990 Indurain clinged to Lemond's wheel on a climb to win a single stage. By 91 he was riding away (notably only after the Pyrenees during which Lemond tried to cover every attack, mostly without much help). I was at this tour and watched Lemond suffer like I've never seen suffering before. It was obvious to everyone watching that a dramatic change had happened. It just doesn't hold any water that Lemond was doping.

You should also learn your history about the 89 time trial. It was short and the course had declining elevation and a slight tailwind, which all helped Lemond post such a fast time (plus the fact that he went all out without knowing time splits, something less controlled than today's riders).


----------



## gonzaleziam (May 14, 2007)

cruso414 said:


> is CONSTANTLY attacking one cyclist after another because he is a bitter old man. He has no proof of anything, just speculation and accusations. I am simply using the Lemond method of thinking, only applying it to him. Maybe Lemond has been beaten by Dave Z, but you know as well as I that Dave HAD to be doping to have beaten such a cycling phenom.



Dont be a hater. It will make you bitter. 

I read somewhere that Lemond's accusations were found to be true (most of them).


And learn your history of this sport because there will always be someone more knowledgeable than you to quickly point out the truth.


----------



## coinstar2k (Apr 17, 2007)

stevesbike said:


> If Lemond was a big doper why did his relative performance decline so dramatically during this period?


Could be that Lemond used drugs until then, and then his performance dropped off. Give Cruso a break. Lemond is a jerk, and I am sick of him too. Great time trial though.


----------



## snood (Oct 5, 2006)

coinstar2k said:


> Could be that Lemond used drugs until then, and then his performance dropped off. Give Cruso a break. Lemond is a jerk, and I am sick of him too. Great time trial though.


Lemond was told by doctor Van Mol that he had to see Ferrari and take EPO to keep up. Thats when he quit racing. thats why he hates Ferrari. He also had teammate die from EPO.


----------



## Guest (Sep 7, 2007)

Please crawl back to the Trek forum.


----------



## cruso414 (Feb 20, 2004)

*the sarcasm totally escaped you on this one....*



stevesbike said:


> sorry but your own 'logic' doesn't even stand up. Prior to the early 90s, the main PEDs were stimulants, which probably had their effect by altering brain signals that regulate fatigue (see the central governor model of fatigue by Tim Noakes e.g, http://www.news.uct.ac.za/mondaypaper/archives/?id=4523). Cyclists were also taking steroids (e.g,. Roche and Delgado) but this limited in terms of aerobic effects (and besides tended to blow out knees-Roche in 88 for example had to miss the season).
> 
> In the early 90s EPO ushered in a new era of PEDS that changes peripheral elements of aeorbic fitness (oxygen carrying capacity of blood). If Lemond was a big doper why did his relative performance decline so dramatically during this period? In 1990 Indurain clinged to Lemond's wheel on a climb to win a single stage. By 91 he was riding away (notably only after the Pyrenees during which Lemond tried to cover every attack, mostly without much help). I was at this tour and watched Lemond suffer like I've never seen suffering before. It was obvious to everyone watching that a dramatic change had happened. It just doesn't hold any water that Lemond was doping.
> 
> You should also learn your history about the 89 time trial. It was short and the course had declining elevation and a slight tailwind, which all helped Lemond post such a fast time (plus the fact that he went all out without knowing time splits, something less controlled than today's riders).


thanks for that dissertation though.:thumbsup:


----------



## philippec (Jun 16, 2002)

Facts = 1
Sarcasm = 0

... but don't let some thoughtful and accurate analysis get in your way!


----------



## filtersweep (Feb 4, 2004)

His TT was basically downhill all the way and with the wind at his back the entire way.... seriously, it was the easiest route ever in the history of the TdF.



cruso414 said:


> I was speaking of Tour de France history. You must have been too mesmerized thinking up that homosexual jab. BTW, married and have 2 kids, you? Does the thought of Greg Lemond conjure up sexual thoughts for you? because I can't see how the rant I originally posted could have lead your mind (or lack of) in such a direction.
> 
> Fastest individual time trial: 54.545 kph (Greg LeMond in 1989 over 24.5 km)


----------



## stevesbike (Jun 3, 2002)

maybe this is more in the language you'll understand. The only thing worse than poor attempts at sarcasm is know-nothing idiots who keep attacking Lemond. Proof? Maybe you should look around for the other posts showing how many Tour podium finishers in the last decade have had a + test (most of them), how about Ullrich's doped blood matched to his DNA sample, Basso booted, and freezers full of blood from riders? The sport is hemmoraging, sponsors are leaving in droves, and it's not because of Lemond-it's because of cheats and team management that has either looked the other way or quietly demanded it from riders. 

Go ahead and attack Lemond, even though I'm guessing you know nothing about him. You can join the ranks of Will Geoghegan and the other Lemond haters--a pretty distinguished crowd.


----------



## karategirl (Aug 27, 2006)

Lemond is not a bitter old man--he is rightfully pissed about what has happened to a sport he cares about, not to mention the fact that PED's cut his career short. Wouldn't YOU be angry? If he indeed raced clean, (and I believe he did) wouldn't the natural reaction to all this doping be anger? And not to get the forum off track here, but where is Lance's sense of moral indignation, if he supposedly raced clean? Even if we buy the fact that he was clean, wouldn't the drugs everyone else was doing make him have to work ten times harder? But he has remained strangely silent. Draw your own conclusions.


----------



## Slartibartfast (Jul 22, 2007)

*Damn straight I'd be angry!...*



karategirl said:


> Lemond is not a bitter old man--he is rightfully pissed about what has happened to a sport he cares about, not to mention the fact that PED's cut his career short. Wouldn't YOU be angry? If he indeed raced clean, (and I believe he did) wouldn't the natural reaction to all this doping be anger? And not to get the forum off track here, but where is Lance's sense of moral indignation, if he supposedly raced clean? Even if we buy the fact that he was clean, wouldn't the drugs everyone else was doing make him have to work ten times harder? But he has remained strangely silent. Draw your own conclusions.


... I'd be angry and bitter too! To see my career disrupted first by a hunting accident, then by a doping culture so formidable I couldn't keep up without succumbing to detestable techniques... On top of that, to see a string of TdF winners either obviously doped or with so many questions as to make every victory hollow... And then, to see accolades piled on Lance, whose accomplishments might have been mine two decades earlier.

I'm not as knowledgeable as many on this forum, but in my opinion Greg is the most talented American ever to spin a pedal, and one of the most talented ever. If he had grown up in Belgium, he might have been the next Eddy rather than the first Lance.

Lemond had a legit shot at six TdF wins but was denied by team dynamics, accidents, appendicitis, injury, and finally, possibly, by doped competitors. If he's angry it's because he's human. If he's bitter, God bless him, I hope he rises above it. In any case, I thank him for saying publicly what most of us can only say in forums like this.


----------



## ultimobici (Jul 16, 2005)

fougasg said:


> ... I'd be angry and bitter too! To see my career disrupted first by a hunting accident, then by a doping culture so formidable I couldn't keep up without succumbing to detestable techniques... On top of that, to see a string of TdF winners either obviously doped or with so many questions as to make every victory hollow... And then, to see accolades piled on Lance, whose accomplishments might have been mine two decades earlier.


+1:thumbsup:


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

If you are still angry and bitter over things that happened 15-20 years ago, you have some issues you should probably deal with with. It's not healthy.

If you are angry and bitter because someone else achieved things that you couldn't, then that's even worse. That's the kind of thing that will take years off your life. Get over it. Move on.


----------



## pedalruns (Dec 18, 2002)

fougasg said:


> ... I'd be angry and bitter too! To see my career disrupted first by a hunting accident, then by a doping culture so formidable I couldn't keep up without succumbing to detestable techniques... On top of that, to see a string of TdF winners either obviously doped or with so many questions as to make every victory hollow... And then, to see accolades piled on Lance, whose accomplishments might have been mine two decades earlier.
> 
> I'm not as knowledgeable as many on this forum, but in my opinion Greg is the most talented American ever to spin a pedal, and one of the most talented ever. If he had grown up in Belgium, he might have been the next Eddy rather than the first Lance.
> 
> Lemond had a legit shot at six TdF wins but was denied by team dynamics, accidents, appendicitis, injury, and finally, possibly, by doped competitors. If he's angry it's because he's human. If he's bitter, God bless him, I hope he rises above it. In any case, I thank him for saying publicly what most of us can only say in forums like this.



++1 I'm a big Greg Lemond fan.


----------



## pianopiano (Jun 4, 2005)

pedalruns said:


> ++1 I'm a big Greg Lemond fan.


:thumbsup: me too! 

Thanks Greg.


----------



## Slartibartfast (Jul 22, 2007)

mohair_chair said:


> If you are angry and bitter because someone else achieved things that you couldn't, then that's even worse. That's the kind of thing that will take years off your life. Get over it. Move on.


Unfortunately you're right -- it can take years off your life. I've never had the impression Greg Lemond is a particularly happy person. I bet he wishes he could get over it. I think he's doing his best.


----------



## eyebob (Feb 3, 2004)

*Finally, PIE talk!*



Bocephus Jones II said:


> I like PIE!!!!


Gheeze, where's the PIE talk gone?

BT


----------



## asciibaron (Aug 11, 2006)

mohair_chair said:


> If you are still angry and bitter over things that happened 15-20 years ago, you have some issues you should probably deal with with. It's not healthy.
> 
> If you are angry and bitter because someone else achieved things that you couldn't, then that's even worse. That's the kind of thing that will take years off your life. Get over it. Move on.


he has a son who is now racing - i think he is concerned for the future of his son.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

asciibaron said:


> he has a son who is now racing - i think he is concerned for the future of his son.


However, if he knows the pitfalls of professional cycling why encourage his son to go in that direction? If it's something his son wants to do as a profession he should sure support him, but also give him the inside information of what it's going to take to make a living at it and let his son decide on what he wants to do.

Again.....The simple fact is any sport has PED problems, not just cycling. If his son wants to be a professional athlete, chances are he's going to end up having to use PED's at one point or another if he wants to be "Paid to Play".

However, if he doesn't want to go that route, there are plenty of options out there for him to pursue. He doesn't have to be a bike racer, or athlete in general.

At the rate Lemond is going, he will have helped ruin the sport his son is competing in and it will be pointless to even be a pro at that time. It doesn't take much with a 2nd or 3rd tier sport....Anybody remember Hockey? That's fallen so far off the radar that cycling gets better ratings now.

Not only that, if he was really concerned about his son he would get off of Lance's butt, and focus on the current riders and the problems they are facing. Chasing after his "Great White Whale" in Lance does nothing any longer, except make him look like he has a vendetta and keep Lances name in the press giving him more notoriety.


----------



## asciibaron (Aug 11, 2006)

why is LeMond going to ruin cycling - did you not watch the TdF last or this year? the riders are doing it well enough themselves. what other top level pro has come out so strongly against doping? why is LA silent? where is Indurian?

he is on LA because he is holding himself up as a role model for not only cycling but cancer victims.


----------



## mohair_chair (Oct 3, 2002)

asciibaron said:


> he has a son who is now racing - i think he is concerned for the future of his son.


He could also be concerned that when his son doesn't win races, that he has an excuse ready to go. Just like Lemond himself at the end of his career.


----------



## dwwheels (Feb 28, 2007)

Pablo said:


> Ah, the flawless logic of "if you're fast you're doping." What a super philosphy.
> 
> As this thread is a hate-fest, I like to ADD that I HATE putting CERTAIN words in ALL capitals to EMPHASIZE certain WORDS. It's ridiculous.


Pablo I only read the all capitalized words because the uncapitalized words are slow and fat.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

asciibaron said:


> why is LeMond going to ruin cycling - did you not watch the TdF last or this year? the riders are doing it well enough themselves. what other top level pro has come out so strongly against doping? why is LA silent? where is Indurian?
> 
> he is on LA because he is holding himself up as a role model for not only cycling but cancer victims.


I'm assuming this was directed at me and my reply above....the "Quote" button is your friend  


Lemond is ruining cycling by not focusing on the problem, which is not Lance. The problem is doping, and he should be concentrating on the current riders in the Pro Peloton, not past riders. He should be proposing solutions to doping, not chasing dopers. He should be working with the UCI on how to tackel the problem, not chasing Lance. 

Why hasn't Lemond gone after Indurain, Riis and all the other dopers? Why hasn't he tried to get their titles taken away? Why just the fixation on Lance?

Lance is his "Great White Whale"....The guy he will take down even if it kills Lemond in the process. He's so focused he can't see anything beyond Lance. What he fails to see is that Lance is for the most part irrelevant when it comes to cycling. He no longer competes, no longer owns a team and no longer plays a major or minor role in cycling other than it's promotion.

The only thing to gain by bringing down Armstrong at this time is personal gain and satisfaction to Lemond.

The simple fact is that everybody is silent because they were all doping. Lemond knows there is no way to catch him even if he did cheat so why not be vocal. He's very ego driven and wants to be remembered as the "Greatest American cyclist ever" which he no longer is due to Lance and his domination of the Tour. BTW...EPO was around when Lemond was competing and riders were using it back then. Was Greg that much better than everybody else? The same could be said for Lance if you say "YES".

What Lemond has been able to achieve so far is to turn cycling into a "Circus" and people are starting to tune in to see what debacle takes place next. What big name will be caught, what big "sting" will take place, will a whole team drop out, etc. They are not tuning in to watch the actual racing, just the "Circus" or "Train Wreck" that cycling has become.

He's not helping at all, he's hurting the sport by not letting things go. Let the sport clean it's self up if it wants to, it doesn't need a former rider to round up the wagons and take it all down.

I doubt there has ever in the history of the Tour that a winner hasn't used PED's (or at least what they though was PED's) and yes, that includes Capitan Ahab himself (Lemond).


----------



## aliensporebomb (Jul 2, 2002)

*Well....*



snood said:


> Lemond was told by doctor Van Mol that he had to see Ferrari and take EPO to keep up. Thats when he quit racing. thats why he hates Ferrari. He also had teammate die from EPO.


That would do it. If a friend & teammate died from it.. That would explain a lot.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

snood said:


> Lemond was told by doctor Van Mol that he had to see Ferrari and take EPO to keep up. Thats when he quit racing. thats why he hates Ferrari. He also had teammate die from EPO.



Why would Lemond hate Ferrari for that? It wasn't Ferrari that told him he had to take EPO, it was Van Mol. Your assertion makes no sense here. 

Also, if Lemond was clean and winning why did he need to take EPO? Why didn't he stick with it an prove all the others wrong? EPO was around during the Tours Lemond won (at least one of them), so obviously he should have been able to win without it.

Having a teammate die from using EPO isn't much of a good reason for his hatred of Ferrari, Lance, or anybody else for that matter. His teammate made the choice to use it, it wasn't forced on him against his will. 

Lance had a teammate die from hitting a wall on a decent, yet that didn't stop him from riding, nor riding without a helmet (which everybody knew wasn't the smartest thing to do). Didn't stop Lance from riding.

Those are nothing but excuses and hearsay. However Lemond can hold a grudge against anybody he wants and he gets to live with his own issues.


----------



## TheDon (Feb 3, 2006)

Wookiebiker,
Epo appeared later in LeMond's career. The peloton got a lot faster and LeMond seemed to slow down. As for attacking Lance, it makes sense. He's a big figure in cycling even today. Not many people know indurain or riis out of cycling, but everyone knows lance. If LeMond can prove Lance doped it's has a much bigger impact than other cyclists. Also, he did go after Landis too. Maybe he goes after Americans only?


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

TheDon said:


> Wookiebiker,
> Epo appeared later in LeMond's career. The peloton got a lot faster and LeMond seemed to slow down. As for attacking Lance, it makes sense. He's a big figure in cycling even today. Not many people know indurain or riis out of cycling, but everyone knows lance. If LeMond can prove Lance doped it's has a much bigger impact than other cyclists. Also, he did go after Landis too. Maybe he goes after Americans only?


EPO has been around since the mid 1980's which falls pretty squarely in Lemonds career.

I find it somewhat funny when you read the story about Lemonds comeback from being shot. If I remember correctly he was riding the Giro and suffering like a dog and was about 1/2 a step from dropping out, then all the sudden his legs magically came around and he was strong again and ended up winning the Tour again.

It just makes one wonder  

From everything I've read and heard legs don't just magically come around and take you from the back of the pack for a week, then the front of the pack the next two....Well, not without a little help.

Attacking Lance when he was a rider made sense. At this time it doesn't. It just makes Lemond look petty and vindictive. 

Granted, not many people in "America" know of Indurain or Riis, but in Europe they are extremely well known as well as or better than Lance. This isn't just an American thing. However, it does play into Lemonds "Ego" and his desire to be the "Greatest American cyclist ever" which may also be the reason why he attacked Landis as well (at least Landis turned up a positive test) and most of the riders on Team Discovery.

In the end Lemond makes it seem like he is the only rider to win the Tour in history that didn't use PED's, when the reality is it looks more and more like no Tour winner has won without PED's (or at least what they felt were PED's).

_One other quick thing to remember....He who shouts the loudest generally has the most to hide! :aureola: 

How many political, sports and business figures have you seen that were shouting at the top of their lungs that they didn't do it, that it was evil and wrong, or people shouldn't participate/condone that type of action.....Only to find out they were doing it secretly in private? Happens all the time.

In the world of cycling nobody and I mean nobody shouts as loud as Lemond._


----------



## pedalruns (Dec 18, 2002)

Wookiebiker said:


> EPO has been around since the mid 1980's which falls pretty squarely in Lemonds career.
> 
> I find it somewhat funny when you read the story about Lemonds comeback from being shot. If I remember correctly he was riding the Giro and suffering like a dog and was about 1/2 a step from dropping out, then all the sudden his legs magically came around and he was strong again and ended up winning the Tour again.
> 
> ...



I wish I had a jersery or t-shirt that said; "I support Greg Lemond and clean cycling" .........so when I run into GL haters, like yourself, I could then 'shout' how much I respect Greg Lemond for being a fighter and a speaker! 

I had a great ride tonight.


----------



## Wookiebiker (Sep 5, 2005)

pedalruns said:


> I wish I had a jersery or t-shirt that said; "I support Greg Lemond and clean cycling" .........so when I run into GL haters, like yourself, I could then 'shout' how much I respect Greg Lemond for being a fighter and a speaker!
> 
> I had a great ride tonight.



Oh....I don't hate Greg Lemond, on the contrary....I respect what he was able to accomplish in his day. I think you will find most people don't hate Lemond, but if it makes you feel better that we do....Knock yourself out.

However, there is no disputing that Lemond hates Armstrong and will do anything to prove Armstrong was a doper (even if he wasn't).

I also don't feel that Lemond was nearly as clean as he wants to present himself as. But if he can sleep at night, good for him. As far as I'm concerned there are no clean riders at the top of the peloton, nor have there ever really been. They were all doing something at one time or another. It might not have been on the "Banned" list, but they were doing something to help boost performance.

I just think it's funny how he has made himself into the doping crime fighter of the pro peloton. He's trying to make himself relevant again by leading the fight, it's kind of sad in some ways and I actually find some pity for him in that he's made it a life consuming pursuit.


----------



## Guest (Sep 21, 2007)

I just think all the extra lead shot in his body has now affected his mind. Great road bike racer - tragically flawed human being ^-^.


----------

