# Lemond vs. Lance: It's getting nuclear



## NeedSpeed

This Lance vs. Lemond thing is getting ugly. Check out these excepts from OTL to be broadcast on Sunday. We're talking threats about Lemond's character and his business interests. They showed clips on the 6 p.m. ET SportsCenter, so I missed it already here in the Midwest. This is going to get much, much uglier. How long before the media tries to get Kristin or Kevin Livingston to say something about Lance and doping.

Plus, remember the rift between Lance/Postal and Cedric Vasseur (who's got problems of his own in this regard)? He apparently flipped off Le Boss and his name has been mud in the peleton ever since. I wonder if he will be next to come out with allegations.

Read this:?*


ESPN.com

A decade before the emergence of Lance Armstrong, Greg Lemond rose to prominence as America's first mainstream cyclist.


Lemond burst onto the national scene with his victory at the Tour de France in 1986, becoming the first American to win cycling's most prestigious event. Almost killed in a hunting accident a year later, Lemond recovered to return to cycling and, in 1989, grabbed the Tour de France's most dramtic win, when he used a blistering final-day ride to overtake France's Laurent Fignon to win the event by eight seconds -- the closest finish ever. Lemond cemented his status in the cycling world when he repeated as champ in 1990.


Now, as Armstrong is threatening to claim his record sixth straight Tour de France title, Lemond speaks with ESPN's Outside the Lines (segments airing Friday on SportsCenter at 6 p.m. ET and in its entirety Sunday at 9:30 a.m. ET) in his first public interview since his 2001 statements questioning Armstrong's relationship with a controversial Italian doctor now on trial for doping.


"If [Armstrong's] clean, it's the greatest comeback. And if he's not, then it's the greatest fraud," Lemond said.


Lemond also discussed the aftermath of his 2001 statements, including receiving an angry phone call from Armstrong. In the call, Lemond claims that Armstrong said that doping was rampant in cycling and threatened to spread rumors that Lemond doped as a rider.


"He basically said 'I could find 10 people that will say you took EPO'," Lemond said. "He basically said 'you know, come on, everybody's done it,' basically kind of like 'hey everybody, EPO's fairly common.' "


Lemond also claims that Armstrong's camp threatened his business interests.


"The week after, I got multiple people that were on Lance ... Lance's camp, basically saying 'you better be quiet,' and I was quiet for three years," Lemond said. "I have a business ... I have bikes that are sold ... and I was told that my sales might not be doing too well if ... just the publicity, the negative publicity."


Reached in France, Armstrong expressed regret about Lemond's assertions.


"Greg's comments are unfortunate because Greg was an idol of mine, but was an idol of everybody in this race," he said. ... This isn't the first time. It's been four years that the shots have been lobbed across the Atlantic when we are over here trying to do good work. We've proven time in and time out that we were clean."


----------



## czardonic

*Of course!*

Lemond is entitled, nay <i>obliged</i>, to raise obvious questions that impugn another rider's name and cast a shadow over the accomplishments that are his bread and butter. How <i>dare</i> Lance's people retaliate by threatening reprecussions for Lemond's biusiness intersts.

"(Lance) basically said. . ." What a laugh. Lemond spins Lance's reactions with such tenacity, there is no way he could stand up straight if he wasn't doping.

"If [Armstrong's] clean, it's the greatest comeback. . ." And one more Lemond claim to fame overshadowed.

Can't Lemond be satisfied with being the sole rider able to win by virtue of his exceptional conditioning and natural talents? Sheesh.


----------



## george_da_trog

What does Trek think about this whole thing. Lance is Trek's boy and Trek owns Lemond bikes. You think someone from Trek would tap Greg on the shoulder and say, "What's you F'ing problem?"

george


----------



## x-wing fighter

*I am on Lemonds side*

Here is why:
1. He feels as though Lance is unfairly attacking him and he has the balls to stand up for himself.

2. He wants professional cycling to be drug free.

3. He is/was a great champion, knows what it takes, and in his mind was screwed out of a victory in 91 due to the infiltration of EPO.

Nevertheless, an argument could certainly be made that he should remain quiet. At least for the sake of his business interests. Anyone who knows him, knows him to be a great guy and very friendly celebrity who graciously gives himself to his fans.

Has the press told us of the blatant accusations Lance has made towards Greg?


----------



## Lazywriter

*It ENRAGES ME to think that one guy's*

statements can be potentially damaging even though they are based on no credible evidence other than "Lemond claims". I seriously doubt Lance would have ever implied that "drugs are rampant" in a conversation to a guy who already made public statements against him. I mean, Lance is not a retard. 
Do I know for sure that Lance isn't on drugs? NO, but I do know for sure that he has never been caught. How do you prove a negative? I have never killed anyone, but if someone accused me of killing a guy 10 years ago in Tahiti ( I have never been there), how can I prove I didn't? Point is that there are an infinite amount of potential accusations anyone can make about anyone else and unless you have the proof, GREG, KEEP YOU $%#KING MOUTH SHUT. Greg wasn't whining about Lance untill he won three and four. Think about it you cry baby. 






george_da_trog said:


> What does Trek think about this whole thing. Lance is Trek's boy and Trek owns Lemond bikes. You think someone from Trek would tap Greg on the shoulder and say, "What's you F'ing problem?"
> 
> george


----------



## CFBlue

*Greg was right.*

It sucks to hear it, but Greg was right with what he's said. He may not be popular on this board, but historically leaders haven't been popular for speaking out and doing the right thing no matter what the public perception was.

I was once a big supporter of Lance Armstrong, but all these allegations add up. Its equally ridiculous that people want to dismiss EVERYTHING anybody has to say if it has to do with Lance and drugs. From old teamates Greg Strock, Stephen Swart, and others, to the USPS team physiotherapist (whom people on this board called b*itch), to a former team physician with Motorola, USPS, whatever. Man NO WAY all these people are covertly tied into some devious plan to destroy cycling. No way.


----------



## Ricky2

*I am Greg's side too.*

This goes back much farther than the newbie cycling fans realize like the other guy pointed out. Greg has been an ardent supporter of a drug-free peloton and him being so close to the pro cycling, he knows a lot of stuff that the internet joes do not and alot that they do not want to hear.


----------



## Traveller

*innocent until proven guilty*

What happened to the concept of proof. Lance is one of the most tested athlete's in the world. he get's unannounced visit at home for testing. If he was cheating he would have been caught by now (based on law of averages). Why can't folks beleive that he can win without drugs. Those who assert that he takes or has taken drugs should prove it or shut up. These accusations are nothing but hot air otherwise. All they have done is made Lance look bad and make him angry. I think that's great for Lance as he is going to be even more motivated to win this one and hopefully the next TDF too.


----------



## Acenturian

I agree with innocent until proven guilty. I respect Lemond, and I think he was a true champion, a great cyclist. However, I think he needs to keep quiet and quit "Lance Bashing". If something comes to prove otherwise, then by all means go after it, and state your opinion. But to make accusations and that is all they are then that shows lack of class.


----------



## czardonic

*Yep.*

No way <i>several</i> people can be wrong!


----------



## x-wing fighter

*lance bashing?*

Lance should quit bashing Greg also.

they still can't test for EPO can they? What is Lance's EPO count? Is it right at the upper limit? I don't know, but I would like to. That would some good evidence eh?


----------



## collinsc

x-wing fighter said:


> Lance should quit bashing Greg also.


You do know that Lemond started all this *****ing dont you? No one was saying **** (certainly Armstrong was not talking trash about Lemond completely unprovoked) until Greg opened up his bitter face.


----------



## mgp

Lemond is bitter. Plain and simple. Was it EPO that made him fat and unmotivated in 1991? Come on, now. For those of us who were die hard Lemond fans back in the day (much more so than we are Lance fans), can't you remember thinking in May/June of 1990 through his retirement in 1994 "damn, Greg, you better get in shape!" It was shades of Ullrich. Lemond was 15-20 pounds overweight and way undertrained. EPO is a convenient excuse for him. Was *every* team other than Z really on EPO when he lost? How ridiculous does that sound. Maybe, just maybe, the European training method of taking the winter off was on the way out, and the new guard realized that you had to bust your hump in the off season.

I don't think that everyone who is venting about this is a crazy Lance fanatic. I think it's more and expression of disappointment in slanderous accusations made by a cycling legend from the past. Where is the evidence? To date, I haven't seen or heard anything that comes close to convincing me. Unless you can prove it, keep your hole shut. Now we have a "Motorola team doctor" making accusations. Yet HE WASN'T THE TEAM DOCTOR WHEN LANCE WAS THERE! Doesn't this seem a little silly.

Is Lance doping now? Doubtful. There are plenty of ways to achieve the same end result. A hypobaric tent is one legal way (and Lance and others readily admit to use).

Did Lance dope in the past? I hope not, but it wouldn't surprise me if he did pre-cancer and maybe even his first year or two post-cancer. It doesn't seem like anyone knows for sure, or has offered convincing evidence of it. To be putting out conclusive statements that he is/was based soley on hearsay is just irresponsible. I think this is why many of us are getting so irritated with this.

Think back to Lemond's comeback in 1989. How would you have reacted if every day Lemond faced accusations of doping? Come on, he was an avid cross-country skier in the off-season. Everyone knows that cross-country skiers did and still do lead the way in innovative new doping methods. Maybe he picked up blood packing from a training buddy. Eh?


----------



## NeedSpeed

What's more, why are none of these accusers offering any contradiction to the fact that when he was 15-16, Lance was kicking grown men's a$$es in triathlons? Why was he asked to take part in the U.S. Olympic Amateur team at such a young age?

Let's review the facts about Armstrong:

• as a young triathlete, he was tested and found to have a one-in-a-million gift of aerobic threshold i.e. low resting heart rate, incredibly efficient heart and VO2 max lung/oxygen capacity. PLUS, his body produces less lactic acid than most other endurance athletes.

• Lance has commented about the experimental drug soup that literally saved his life. He also admitted to using a variant/form of EPO during his treatments and to counter the effects of chemo. If there is any debate at all, it should be regarding his dominant performance in 1999's Tour.

• post-cancer, his body changed physically. By using experimental treatments, he was able to save the effect of cancer treatments upon his lungs — which othewise certainly would have ended his competitive career. Plus, he stopped hotdogging, stopped relying on talent alone, got humble and started training his butt off.

• From the mid-point of the 1999 Tour, Armstrong became the most queried, tested rider in the peleton. If he can find a way to dope while avoiding getting caught with all of those tests over the last six years, he's the smartest athlete on the planet (in terms of avoiding getting busted)

I've only one question besides wanting to see proof he is indeed doping (innocent until proven guilty) and that is this: does the IOC/USOC have more advanced drug testing procedures than Le Tour and the UCI? If so, there may be reason to question if that was a factor in Lance declining his US Olympic Cycling Team spot. 

But if this guy has been a genetic freak of nature since he was a kid, why wouldn't he retain those capabilities as a seasoned professional?


----------



## Ricky2

*Hypobaric my azz!*



mgp said:


> Is Lance doping now? Doubtful. There are plenty of ways to achieve the same end result. A hypobaric tent is one legal way (and Lance and others readily admit to use).



HahAHAH! Rrrrrrrr-ight buddy. All that an athlete has to do to get the equal benefits of EPO is get a hypobaric tent! Damn! I guess someone forgot to tell David Millar this!


----------



## Ricky2

NeedSpeed said:


> ? From the mid-point of the 1999 Tour, Armstrong became the most queried, tested rider in the peleton. If he can find a way to dope while avoiding getting caught with all of those tests over the last six years, he's the smartest athlete on the planet (in terms of avoiding getting busted)


No. You don't have to be smart. That's what bloodtests and doctors are for. I, myself, can drive down to a clinic and get my blood tested to see what my hematocrit level is. If its getting too high, like over the limit, then I can back off the EPO. See, no positive test, right there! Hard work + EPO is a winning combination.


----------



## x-wing fighter

*gregs actual true comment*



collinsc said:


> You do know that Lemond started all this *****ing dont you? No one was saying **** (certainly Armstrong was not talking trash about Lemond completely unprovoked) until Greg opened up his bitter face.


he said: if Lance did this comeback clean, it is the greatest ever. 

I agree

he also said: if not, he is the greatest fraud ever.

I agree

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

How is it that some can believe Greg is bitter with out proof, but believe Lance is and has always been clean without proof. I don't know the answer to either question. Only Lance and Greg do.


----------



## The Human G-Nome

Ricky2 said:


> No. You don't have to be smart. That's what bloodtests and doctors are for. I, myself, can drive down to a clinic and get my blood tested to see what my hematocrit level is. If its getting too high, like over the limit, then I can back off the EPO. See, no positive test, right there! Hard work + EPO is a winning combination.


Ya, that's real nice Ricky. Now please explain to me how you're going to test negative when your hematocrit level will still be in the +3-4% range for almost 2 weeks after you've stopped taking it. If your hematocrit level is normal, then you're not getting the positive results of the EPO to begin with... ie, more RBCs, higher oxygen capacity to feed hungry muscles.


----------



## ParticleMan

Traveller said:


> What happened to the concept of proof. Lance is one of the most tested athlete's in the world. he get's unannounced visit at home for testing. If he was cheating he would have been caught by now (based on law of averages). Why can't folks beleive that he can win without drugs. Those who assert that he takes or has taken drugs should prove it or shut up. These accusations are nothing but hot air otherwise. All they have done is made Lance look bad and make him angry. I think that's great for Lance as he is going to be even more motivated to win this one and hopefully the next TDF too.



Didnt Lance's great buddy MILLAR always tested negative too???? Wsnt he tested lots of times as well... and didnt he ride great time trails??? But we all know whwat he was on.,.. So whats wrong with questioning blind faith and loyalty to Texan boy??? Unless you are all afraid that he is not clean actually, and Lemond was RIGHT!!!


----------



## rroselli

• as a young triathlete, he was tested and found to have a one-in-a-million gift of aerobic threshold i.e. low resting heart rate, incredibly efficient heart and VO2 max lung/oxygen capacity. PLUS, his body produces less lactic acid than most other endurance athletes

Yep - IMH sometimes we get a small window to watch extraordinary athletes do incredible things and should enjoy the moments. - Pele, Sampras, Montana, Jordan, Woods and yes Armstrong


----------



## The Human G-Nome

ParticleMan said:


> Didnt Lance's great buddy MILLAR always tested negative too???? Wsnt he tested lots of times as well... and didnt he ride great time trails??? But we all know whwat he was on.,.. So whats wrong with questioning blind faith and loyalty to Texan boy??? Unless you are all afraid that he is not clean actually, and Lemond was RIGHT!!!


So the LA haters want to bring in the Millar analogy? Fine. Why is NO ONE bringing up the fact that the Euskatel Euskadi team doctor was suspended before the Tour for doing............ that's right folks, administering EPO to Millar. And what does that say about Iban Mayo and the Orange Crush? Everyone is down on Lance because the Motorola team doctor was fired and said LA was using even though he was fired A YEAR BEFORE LA was even on the team (ditto Brunyeel). So if this really isn't just an LA witchhunt, then let's hear some speculation about Mayo. Got it in you?


----------



## ParticleMan

The Human G-Nome said:


> So the LA haters want to bring in the Millar analogy? Fine. Why is NO ONE bringing up the fact that the Euskatel Euskadi team doctor was suspended before the Tour for doing............ that's right folks, administering EPO to Millar. And what does that say about Iban Mayo and the Orange Crush? Everyone is down on Lance because the Motorola team doctor was fired and said LA was using even though he was fired A YEAR BEFORE LA was even on the team (ditto Brunyeel). So if this really isn't just an LA witchhunt, then let's hear some speculation about Mayo. Got it in you?



Simply put - testing negative all the time, like Mr Millar, is NO evidence of being clean. I am sure even you can understand this? Instead of putting everything down to Lance bashing....


----------



## Ricky2

ParticleMan said:


> Didnt Lance's great buddy MILLAR always tested negative too???? Wsnt he tested lots of times as well... and didnt he ride great time trails??? But we all know whwat he was on.,.. So whats wrong with questioning blind faith and loyalty to Texan boy??? Unless you are all afraid that he is not clean actually, and Lemond was RIGHT!!!



Millar isn't the only rider to have tested negative, but still got busted on EPO. Virenque, Pantani, Manzano, the list is looooooong! Someone needs to tell the treasurer of the Armstrong Fan Club that. This is common knowledge. Athletes have been doping with EPO and still monitor hematocrit levels so they don't go over the legal limit.


----------



## ParticleMan

Careful there Ricky with those remarks.. lest the Followers of Lance give u a 'Lemond Bashing' for even insinuating questioning Lance's record and performance. After all, he is sooo clean he can gift any stage he wants... Oops, sorry Texans!


----------



## collinsc

Ricky2...ParticleMan...I am so glad idiots like you two dont run the judicial system around here.

Innocent until proven guilty, I say. If not, then my accusations are as meaninful as Lemond's and ParticleMan is a pedophile, and Ricky2 sells crack to children.


----------



## Ricky2

ParticleMan said:


> Careful there Ricky with those remarks.. lest the Followers of Lance give u a 'Lemond Bashing' for even insinuating questioning Lance's record and performance. After all, he is sooo clean he can gift any stage he wants... Oops, sorry Texans!



Whoa bud! Slow down. I'm a native Texan, but trust me Lance Armstrong doesn't represent us all! You're right, if you use drugs and Lance in the same sentence, then the Lance Fan Club will cry foul!


----------



## cyclejim

So going by what Lemond the buttwipe and lots of others seem to think, everyone in the Peloton is doped right? That should pretty much level the playing field correct? If everyone is doped is the best rider still winning? Or is it just the squeaky clean ones like old Greg that were/are penalized because of the doping. Here an idea, lets just legalize doping and make it a free for all! Yea thats it. The rider who dopes the hardest without dying would surely be the best then.


----------



## ParticleMan

collinsc said:


> Ricky2...ParticleMan...I am so glad idiots like you two dont run the judicial system around here.
> 
> Innocent until proven guilty, I say. If not, then my accusations are as meaninful as Lemond's and ParticleMan is a pedophile, and Ricky2 sells crack to children.



interesting double standards apply when Lance is discussed in anything connected to Lemond, Doping, Gifting stages, etc... is that part of your judicial system? sad.....


----------



## Ricky2

cyclejim said:


> So going by what Lemond the buttwipe and lots of others seem to think, everyone in the Peloton is doped right?


No cyclejim. Greg didn't say that.


----------



## CFBlue

*Please Lance Fans! Stop the idol worship and insane devotion!*



cyclejim said:


> So going by what Lemond the buttwipe and lots of others seem to think, everyone in the Peloton is doped right? That should pretty much level the playing field correct? If everyone is doped is the best rider still winning? Or is it just the squeaky clean ones like old Greg that were/are penalized because of the doping. Here an idea, lets just legalize doping and make it a free for all! Yea thats it. The rider who dopes the hardest without dying would surely be the best then.



OK, this is getting out of hand. I think some people are getting mad and can't even carry on a civil conversation about Armstrong and drugs without resorting to mudslinging. Look at the Armstrong idolatry in that post. "Lemond the buttwipe"? Claims that Greg said that "everyone" is doped??? Sorry to burst your bubble jim. It wasn't Greg that said everyone was on EPO. It was Lance Armstrong himself saying that everyone was using EPO, according to excerpts from the Armstrong's former team physician.


----------



## ParticleMan

Ricky2 said:


> No cyclejim. Greg didn't say that.


Ricky... he wrote 'seemed to think'... didnt u know cyclejim now reads minds and makes his own innuendos?


----------



## russw19

x-wing fighter said:


> 3. He is/was a great champion, knows what it takes, and in his mind was screwed out of a victory in 91 due to the infiltration of EPO.



EPO didn't really hit the peloton until 1995. Top riders may have goten hold of it as early as right before the World's in 1993 but it wasn't widespread (by most riders accounts) until 1995. 

You seem to imply that Indurain was doped. Where do you get that? There wasn't even a whisper of Indurain being doped then and nothing has been said about him since. And just for the record, Lemond had bad allergies to a common summer pollen in France that caused him problems with bronchitis, which is the ailment that knocked him out of the Tour in 1992. In 1991 he finished 7th 13 minutes down to Indurain after Indurain crushed him on the way into Val Louron.

If Lemond is so outspoken about drug use in the peloton and felt "screwed out of a victory in 91" why has he never uttered a negative word against Indurain?

Just trying to set the record a little more straight.


----------



## Ricky2

russw19 said:


> EPO didn't really hit the peloton until 1995. Top riders may have goten hold of it as early as right before the World's in 1993 but it wasn't widespread (by most riders accounts) until 1995.
> 
> You seem to imply that Indurain was doped. Where do you get that? There wasn't even a whisper of Indurain being doped then and nothing has been said about him since. And just for the record, Lemond had bad allergies to a common summer pollen in France that caused him problems with bronchitis, which is the ailment that knocked him out of the Tour in 1992. In 1991 he finished 7th 13 minutes down to Indurain after Indurain crushed him on the way into Val Louron.
> 
> If Lemond is so outspoken about drug use in the peloton and felt "screwed out of a victory in 91" why has he never uttered a negative word against Indurain?
> 
> Just trying to set the record a little more straight.



I agree with you that EPO wasn't widespread until the mid 90s, but before then some cyclists (not just at the top) were experimenting with it. Paul Kimmage, the 1st rider who broke silence spoke of such. Indurain had a teamate that got busted on doping in 93. Rondon? Don't remember his name. That's where the suspicion came from, not just from stuff today. So, even back then there were people that thought that Indurain was doping, especially with the Delgado scandal in 88 and then the 93 incident. I think Greg probably knew about it and felt cheated those years. Even though I think LeMond felt he was more robbed from a Tour win in 85 when La Vie Claire promised that they would support him after it was clear he was stronger than Hinault and Hinault even said that he would never attack a teamate in Yellow. Well, Hinault lied and stole the jersey away from LeMond that year.


----------



## TPC

"This is my body. And I can do whatever I want to it. I can push it. Study it. Tweak it. Listen to it. Everybody wants to know what I'm on. What am I on? I'm on my bike busting my ass six hours a day. What are you on?"

He's got the hardest work ethic of anyone in the peloton. Why is hard to believe that he would dominate the sport?

But I suppose dominating a sport is proof positive of drugs, right? Ergo when Tiger Woods won the Masters by 12 strokes he must have been doped up too, right? RIGHT???


----------



## gotbones

*EPO, hypobaric chambers, improved training methods*

To clarify a few things...

There isn't a good test for EPO and that's why the hematocrit is used instead. And yes, there are ways to manipulate your hematocrit.

Hypobaric chambers do help. Ask anyone who has lived at altitude and then has come down to sea level (e.g. all the Kenyan runners, the US athletes that go to the OTC in Colorado Springs, etc.) After living and training at 6500' for six months, it felt like the air at sea level was super saturated with oxygen when I raced.

Training methods have improved greatly in recent years and from what I've read, Lance has access to some of the best minds and methods. Combine this with his obsessiveness, focus, and natural talent.... Also, after going through chemo and all the cancer treatment, his relative pain threshold is probably a lot higher than most.

I'll still go with innocent until PROVEN guilty.


----------



## mgp

Ricky2, you have some good points, but don't dilute them by displaying your ignorance regarding physiology. Here's a homework task for you over the weekend: research the effect of EPO (and derivatives) on the body. Now research the effect of altitude training. (It could be argued that the effect of altitude training surpass those of EPO, as it brings into play more sytems and a more complete adaptation)


----------



## russw19

Ricky2 said:


> I agree with you that EPO wasn't widespread until the mid 90s, but before then some cyclists (not just at the top) were experimenting with it. Paul Kimmage, the 1st rider who broke silence spoke of such. Indurain had a teamate that got busted on doping in 93. Rondon? Don't remember his name. That's where the suspicion came from, not just from stuff today. So, even back then there were people that thought that Indurain was doping, especially with the Delgado scandal in 88 and then the 93 incident. I think Greg probably knew about it and felt cheated those years. Even though I think LeMond felt he was more robbed from a Tour win in 85 when La Vie Claire promised that they would support him after it was clear he was stronger than Hinault and Hinault even said that he would never attack a teamate in Yellow. Well, Hinault lied and stole the jersey away from LeMond that year.



Ricky, I am not trying to say I am right and you are wrong with this, but I have a few questions about your above post. First, I have Kimmage's book and he spoke out against steroid and amphetamine use, not EPO. Pedro Delgado tested positive for Probenicide which is a steroid masking drug. Chances are he was actually on Nandrolone which was gaining popularity at the time amoung European footballers and track athletes. In 1990, Gert-Jan Theunisse tested positive for testosterone use, but was not banned due to a procedural error. Ironically some riders went on strike as a result of his non-ban, as this was his second positive test in 3 years. 

I know that the UCI placed EPO on the banned substance list as early as 1992, but it wasn't in widespread use yet because it was about 15 times more expensive then. A year's worth of dosing would have been in the hundred's of thousands of dollars whereas now a year's worth is somewhere between 6 to 12 grand. Prior to better synthetics in around 1994 or 1995, it was far too expensive to be used in sport. HGH was gaining ground then as a drug of choice, but Nandrolone and Clenbuterol were the most popular steroids and amphetemine use was the other big one. 

Also, if I remember right, in 1985 Lemond wasn't bitter about his Tour loss. He was told on one stage to sit up and wait for Hinault on a stage where he could have taken the overall lead himself, but waited for Hinault and pulled him back into the race where Hinault went on to win. After the 85 Tour Hinault vowed to ride for Lemond in 86 but instead decided he would try for his 6th Tour. That caused a separation in La Vie Claire where the English speaking riders sided with and rode for Lemond and the French speaking riders rode for Hinault. Again, if I remember correctly, it wasn't the 85 Tour that upset Lemond, it was the 86 Tour where Hinault backed out of his promise to ride in support of Lemond to repay him for 85.

As for Indurain's wins... again, I have never read even a hint that they were tainted. Indurain was an extremely gifted athlete. He had a VO2 max of over 8 liters. He had the largest lung capacity of any athlete tested to date from what I understand. 

Albelardo Rondon did not ride for Banesto's 93 squad. Here's a list of the starters for that Tour.
BANESTO
1 INDURAIN Miguel (Esp)
2 ALONSO Marino (Esp)
3 BERNARD Jean-François (Fra)
4 DELGADO Pedro (Esp)
5 GARMENDIA Aitor (Esp) np.6°
6 GOROSPE Julian (Esp)
7 INDURAIN Prudencio (Esp)
8 RUE Gérard (Fra)
9 URIARTE Jose-Ramon (Esp)

In 1993 Rondon did ride for Gatorade (Gianni Bugno's team) So I have to ask if you are sure of your facts or are you guessing at what you may remember? Rondon rode for Banesto in 1991 but he wasn't tossed from the Tour.... he finished 12th overall. He finished the Tour in 92 as well.


----------



## Ricky2

No, that's correct. I don't remember the guy's name in 93. I could've sworn it was Rondon. Or maybe, Rondon was a Banesto rider in 92 or something. I do, recall, however, the Delgado scandal. He didn't actually test positive for a banned substance, but the lab found traces of a masking agent. Nandrolone was a popular one back in the 70s and early 80s because, to my knowledge, it was the THG back then. Undectable because the tests weren't up to snuff. I don't actually own Kimmage's book. I have read a little from it from a friend's borrowed copy. My knowledge about Kimmage actually comes from the club I used to train with in Begium way back in the days. I'm old and not riding anymore. There were two Irish guys on that team that knew him. That book, was just the tip, an inkling. Theunisse didn't only get busted on test, but also clen I think. Rumor was that him and Rook used to train in a mountainous island in the offseason and a little before the Tour (Canary Islands maybe) and meet up with their trainer several times a year who was heavily doping them. So, the Kimmage stuff isn't actually directly from the book. Though I borrowed it from my friend long ago. Got some pretty interesting stuff in there about tricking the system and how they did it back then.


----------



## Guest

I don't know why everyone is so surprised at LeMond's comments. LeMond has always been a self-centred "small" man and this interview simply proves the point yet again.

LeMond against te world - again.

Difference this time is that this will cost him in a big way. In dollars and cents. I expect he will be sued, I also expect that the LeMond brand of bikes will very quickly disappear from production.

I would expect that he has already been summoned to a meeting at Trek HQ where he will be told that the brand is being dropped.

LeMond is and always has been a self-centred twit. All he has done with this interview is prove that he also an idiot.


----------



## blackhat

*.............*



toomanybikes said:


> ........I would expect that he has already been summoned to a meeting at Trek HQ where he will be told that the brand is being dropped...........


yeah, I'll bet <i>that</i> happened...I mean why continue to carry a brand that makes your company <b>$</b> when you can drop them to "defend" one of your sponsored athletes near the end of his run? makes perfect sense.


----------



## Ricky2

mgp said:


> Ricky2, you have some good points, but don't dilute them by displaying your ignorance regarding physiology. Here's a homework task for you over the weekend: research the effect of EPO (and derivatives) on the body. Now research the effect of altitude training. (It could be argued that the effect of altitude training surpass those of EPO, as it brings into play more sytems and a more complete adaptation)



I guess someone forgot to clue in David Millar, Panatani, Virenque, Michele Ferrari that altitude tents are the shiznit and that EPO is just a waste of time and money!!


----------



## Ricky2

ParticleMan said:


> Ricky... he wrote 'seemed to think'... didnt u know cyclejim now reads minds and makes his own innuendos?


hahah! oops. missed that one. Yeah, I guess jim's quite a mind reader. Hey jim, if you're still following this, how many fingers am I holding up?


----------



## CFBlue

sorry, messed up message. try below.


----------



## CFBlue

*mpg - Uh no dude. Altitude chambers are not the equal to EPO.*

mgp, who keeps saying stuff about altitude chambers besting EPO. Others are right! Come on! Go down to the local bike shop and read up on David Millar. Maybe, go down to the nearest hospital ward and tell all those doctors to quit giving EPO to anemic dying patients. Yeah, just tell them to stick the patients in a tent!

Secondly, just because a rider has a good performance does not mean he is on something. The difference is, unlike other riders with good performances, Armstrong has had scores of people talk about his alleged past drug use from former teamates, physiotherapists, former team physicians, etc. THAT'S the difference. I highly doubt all of these people are somehow covertly involved in some secret plan to destroy cycling.


----------



## andy02

I would be intresting to see if you took a liter of blood from armstrong then looked the time it took for him to regain his starting RBC count. Maybe his real gift is ablity to regenerate RBCs.... It should it least be possible


----------



## gotbones

Manhattan said:


> mgp, who keeps saying stuff about altitude chambers besting EPO. Others are right! Come on! Go down to the local bike shop and read up on David Millar. Maybe, go down to the nearest hospital ward and tell all those doctors to quit giving EPO to anemic dying patients. Yeah, just tell them to stick the patients in a tent!
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> EPO is used for anemic patients when their ability to produce EPO on their own is severely impaired, for instance with renal insufficiency. It's a completely different situation. A healthy person put into a hypoxic environment, whether it's a tent or a mountain top, will produce more EPO naturally. There's also a change in the red blood cells that let's them process oxygen transfer more efficiently. You can google high altitude training or if you want a clear explanation: http://www.pfitzinger.com/hat.shtml.
> 
> While I'm not qualified to say whether or not LA is using drugs I don't think anyone else here is either. All I've heard is rumor and innuendo.
> 
> Why is it so hard to believe that a genetically gifted athlete with an incredible work ethic, excellent coaching, and access to the best in sports science can achieve great things?


----------



## Ricky2

*EPO, Actovegan, corticosteroid meds,,,*

Oh so did all these people, old teamates, masseuses, team physicians, etc. say that Armstrong is now using a altitude tent? Ummmm, let's so. NOPE! It's the dope.

What's up with USPS dumping those actovegan baggies and syringes in a dumpster a few kms from their hotel at the Tour a couple years ago?


----------



## FatSlowGuy

You people would suck as lawyers. So far this is all here say and unnuendo. Following your arguments I must be on crack because it was found near my house in Hollywood, or I must be on EPO because I do not test for it. Get a life and wait for real evidence, if there is any.


----------



## Lazywriter

*Ricky*

Seeing the patterns of all your comment I have come to the conclusion that you are just a contrarian a$$hole who will argue against anything, even his own convictions. I hate to see you on a jury. You are dense a lack any objectivity.




Ricky2 said:


> Oh so did all these people, old teamates, masseuses, team physicians, etc. say that Armstrong is now using a altitude tent? Ummmm, let's so. NOPE! It's the dope.
> 
> What's up with USPS dumping those actovegan baggies and syringes in a dumpster a few kms from their hotel at the Tour a couple years ago?


----------



## Ricky2

*Another club member bites the dust*



Lazywriter said:


> Seeing the patterns of all your comment I have come to the conclusion that you are just a contrarian a$$hole who will argue against anything, even his own convictions. I hate to see you on a jury. You are dense a lack any objectivity.



Sorry you've just joined the party and didn't feel the need to read anything. Its like Greg said. And I'm sure the Lance Fan Club members agree that anybody that uses the words Lance and drugs in the same sentence is a liar or is out to destroy cycling. Did you just renew your membership today?


----------



## MaRider

Ricky2 said:


> Sorry you've just joined the party and didn't feel the need to read anything. Its like Greg said. And I'm sure the Lance Fan Club members agree that anybody that uses the words Lance and drugs in the same sentence is a liar or is out to destroy cycling. Did you just renew your membership today?


Not from Lance Fan club, but let's sum up:

There is no evidence of Lance using drugs. At least I don't seem to find much. And it's not like people didn't try - for years!

So if you like to accuse Lance, then out of fairness of the argument you might as well accuse every other rider in peloton who never tested positive for anything - Basso, Ullrich, Hamilton, etc. Why pick on Lance? Because he is the popular target I guess.

Moreover, if you really wanna pick on someone, pick on guys who HAVE been caught - like Virenque, Pantani, Millar, etc. Why doesn't anyone write books about these guys? Because that's not what sells $$$.

Greg LeMond IS and WAS bitter about Lance, I remember some strange comments about Lance many years ago, having nothing to do with drugs. It was weird at the time, as I assumed a former US champion would welcome another american rider who is doing well. I guess not. Lance may seem like an arrogant snob from Texas sometimes, but at least he has learned a few things about sportsmanship and has shown plenty of respect for his competitors, and certainly for his fellow american riders. If 10-20 years from now Lance is badmouthing a new up-and-coming US cycling hope I will be truly disappointed in Lance too, just like I am disappointed in Greg's comments.

The sentence about "if Lance is using EPO he is a cheat, but if he is clean, well, that's a great comeback" is outrage. Technically we all may agree with the jist of both statements, but the delivery has strong implication that Lance is a cheat. Does Greg say the same thing about other riders in the peloton today? No, seems he has a thing for Lance.

I find the whole thing rather sad. I am 100% open to possibility of Lance, or anyone else out there doping, but until there's been solid proof, I would withhold my personal biases and speculations, because it's simply not doing anybody any good to implicate someone just because you don't like them personally, or think their performance is "out of this world". That's just poor sportsmanship, and I am disappointed that while a great winner in his prime, Greg LeMond turns out to also be a sore loser.


----------



## Ricky2

*Big difference there*



MaRider said:


> Not from Lance Fan club, but let's sum up:
> 
> So if you like to accuse Lance, then out of fairness of the argument you might as well accuse every other rider in peloton who never tested positive for anything - Basso, Ullrich, Hamilton, etc.



The difference is that the other athletes don't have scores of people associated with them saying that yes, in fact, they are on EPO. Lance old comrades have stated as such.


----------



## russw19

Ricky2 said:


> No, that's correct. I don't remember the guy's name in 93. I could've sworn it was Rondon. Or maybe, Rondon was a Banesto rider in 92 or something. I do, recall, however, the Delgado scandal. He didn't actually test positive for a banned substance, but the lab found traces of a masking agent.


Rondon did ride for Banesto thru the 92 season, but he finished the Tour in 91 and 92, so he didn't get tossed for any positives. However he didn't finish the Tour in 93 when he was riding with Gatorade, and I can't find anything to state if he crashed out, quit, or was tossed. So if it was him as you remember, it could have been in 93, but he was on Bugno's team then, not Indurain's. 

And you are right about Delgado. His "positive" was for Probenicide, which is what Garzelli tested positive for a couple years ago in the Giro. Probenicide was used to mask Testosterone and Nandrolone use, and it was banned by FIFA and the USOC at that time, but the UCI hadn't added it yet. So Delgado was allowed to keep racing because he wasn't officially caught with anything illegal (kinda like Johnny Mosely in the Salt Lake Olympics testing positive for pot --- as if that actually increases performance!) Since it wasn't on the list, there was nothing they could really do, even though everyone knew he was doped.

It was kinda funny a couple years ago when Garzelli tested for it. It is now on the list, but it's a diuretic, so it really is a horrible drug for a cyclist to take.... and the tests for steroids are better now, so it won't mask the use anymore. So to test positive for that now (or 2 years ago) was really bizarre! Mapei stuck with the tainted milk at breakfast theroy because 2 other team members (a team doctor and mechanic if I remember right) also showed signs of taking it. 

I wish someone would write a book about the actual positive tests because some of the stories behind them are really quite amusing! Like Simoni and the cocaine cough drops/dentist appointment... Rumsas's wife's ordeal and how the drugs were for her mother.... Frank Vandenbrook's EPO in his fridge being for his sick dog!.... Just like I am personally amused to all heck with this Lance vs. Greg story. I love that people are getting so up in arms over it, because I just find it funny as all hell!

Cheers, and thanks for helping me take that walk down memory lane!

Russ


----------



## mgp

Scores of people? We know you have no clue about science, but now you display your ignorance about number systems. When you can print up a list of "scores" of people, we'd be glad to read it. By the way, a score = 20. You'd better get back to work, Ricky, or someone is going to be really pissed that you gave them fries instead of onion rings with their burger.

Lazywriter, I think you nailed it. I'll bet Ricky and others were actually big fans of Lance until he got too popular. Then it wasn't cool anymore, so they become the Lance bashers. They probably don't like U2 anymore because...wait, U2 does suck, now. They don't like REM anymore because now they are too mainstream!


----------



## xcmntgeek

Hey Ricky, guess what-I heard you've been selling some heroin? Is that true? Maybe you're a user too. In fact, I'm sure I could find 4 disgruntled co-workers and a doctor who (if given the proper motivation) would be willing to concur with me. Eh? How much do you trust the people around you? Maybe you imbezeled some funds too.

Oh, I got hit with a random drug test at a large race. I was negative. Does this mean I'm on the neddle? I also have a naturally high hematocrit (last blood work done it was 48.3) yet all I do is ride my bike. Give it up.


----------



## mgp

Manhattan said:


> mgp, who keeps saying stuff about altitude chambers besting EPO. Others are right! Come on! Go down to the local bike shop and read up on David Millar. Maybe, go down to the nearest hospital ward and tell all those doctors to quit giving EPO to anemic dying patients. Yeah, just tell them to stick the patients in a tent!


Sheesh, what has happened to our education system? Did you go to the same University as Ricky and not learn a thing in your science courses? I need a "shaking head" emoticon, it isn't even worth trying to explain...  

EPO and analogs are by far the most *convenient* way to boost hematocrit. They are also the only way to boost your hematocrit to unnaturally high levels, i.e. levels 5% or more higher than your natural level. If your goal is to boost your hematocrit to a level up to 50% (the limit in pro cycling), then it can effectively be done with an altitude chamber. It just takes more planning, more attention to detail, and more of a willingness to impact your life with a huge inconvenience. Knowing Lance Armstrong's fanatical attention to detail and preparation, it doesn't surprise me that this would be his choice.


----------



## Lazywriter

*MGP, this guy Ricky has about the most flawed logic I*

have ever seen. If EPO is so revolutioanry, why is it that the average speeds of the TDF aren't much faster than pre-EPO years (around 25mph). I mean, you have to factor in improvements in equipment, training and nutrition, but still, the overall speed for the entire tour isn't that much faster considering that this wonder drug can make a man into a super human. It is a known fact that Lance trains harder than anyone else in the Peleton and yet his margins of victory are within minutes of the second and third place finishers. You would think that he finished 45 minutes ahead of second place year in year out. 
As far as his health history, endorsements and charities, I think he would be crazy to risk being expesed as a doper. Until he admits it or is caught, he is clean and Ricky is a douchebag. 





mgp said:


> Sheesh, what has happened to our education system? Did you go to the same University as Ricky and not learn a thing in your science courses? I need a "shaking head" emoticon, it isn't even worth trying to explain...
> 
> EPO and analogs are by far the most *convenient* way to boost hematocrit. They are also the only way to boost your hematocrit to unnaturally high levels, i.e. levels 5% or more higher than your natural level. If your goal is to boost your hematocrit to a level up to 50% (the limit in pro cycling), then it can effectively be done with an altitude chamber. It just takes more planning, more attention to detail, and more of a willingness to impact your life with a huge inconvenience. Knowing Lance Armstrong's fanatical attention to detail and preparation, it doesn't surprise me that this would be his choice.


----------



## russw19

*Ignore... null post*

Blah!!!!! This was some silly semantics argument that won't really matter to anyone reading this thread....

Ignore it. Sorry for the null post.


----------



## wongsifu_mk

*Lemond vs. Lance: It's getting stupid (nm)*

No message – Stick a fork in this post....


----------



## CFBlue

*4 letter words for Lazy people*



Lazywriter said:


> have ever seen. If EPO is so revolutioanry, why is it that the average speeds of the TDF aren't much faster than pre-EPO years (around 25mph). I mean, you have to factor in improvements in equipment, training and nutrition, but still, the overall speed for the entire tour isn't that much faster considering that this wonder drug can make a man into a super human. It is a known fact that Lance trains harder than anyone else in the Peleton and yet his margins of victory are within minutes of the second and third place finishers. You would think that he finished 45 minutes ahead of second place year in year out.
> As far as his health history, endorsements and charities, I think he would be crazy to risk being expesed as a doper. Until he admits it or is caught, he is clean and Ricky is a douchebag.




I happen to disagree with some of the thoughts shared by some viewers. I also happen to share similar thoughts as Ricky, Russ, blackhat, Particle, etc. some others on this very post. Does that too make me a "douchebag" or "a$$hole" like Ricky and others as you like to throw around? I wish you were down in my old 'hood in NYC. I know you wouldn't say that to my face. You're style is when you disagree with someone about Lance and drugs, instead of sticking to the topic and having a discussion or even an argument about it, you throw around your immature antics and douchebag comments.

I think the majority of the people believe that Armstrong is clean. Does it make the small minority douchebags and creeps for expressing other opinions. Stone meet glass. Keep it on the topic without the slimeball antics.

Armstrong has had numerous allegations about drug use. Nobody is saying that it is hardly undeniable proof, but well worth an investigation. Some folks, myself included, are critical of Armstrong's denials because seems like each day more and more people that were previously associated with Armstrong or his team are speaking up and saying very specific things, not just general finger pointing. Doping is more widespread than you think and Armstrong may not be the perfect angel everyone thinks he is.


----------



## Lazywriter

*Manhattan, you miss the point*

It is not what Ricky says, it is how he says it because he is contrary in general (see other topics he posts on). As far as me meeting you "in the hood", I am from Brooklyn and grew up on the streets and live right outside of NYC. So don't tell me how tough you are cousine. You aren't too bright if you come to a conclusion of guilt based on the lack of evidence you present. Watch Lance's interviews on Charlie Rose that he has done and you will see him talk about this issue and the accusations. Does it mean he is clean? No, but there is no proof to the contrary that has "exposed" him yet and like he says in the interview, people just don't want to believe that he accomplishes things based on hard work so he must be on drugs.
What about the countless hours of wind tunnel testing, training rides in the Alps and soley focusing on the Tour? Is EPO the sole reason for his success if he is indeed on it? Hell, is Barry Bonds the best HR hitter because of roids or does he have an incredible eye for the ball? It is well known that Lance uses hypoxic tents that have same effects as EPO. So without any evidence to support the accusations, your accusal is about as legitimate as me seeing you coming out of that gay bar on the West Side Highway. Wasn't that you? Can you prove it wasn't you? Not that there is anything wrong with it, but I swear it was you. Later tough guy.




QUOTE=Manhattan]I happen to disagree with some of the thoughts shared by some viewers. I also happen to share similar thoughts as Ricky, Russ, blackhat, Particle, etc. some others on this very post. Does that too make me a "douchebag" or "a$$hole" like Ricky and others as you like to throw around? I wish you were down in my old 'hood in NYC. I know you wouldn't say that to my face. You're style is when you disagree with someone about Lance and drugs, instead of sticking to the topic and having a discussion or even an argument about it, you throw around your immature antics and douchebag comments.

I think the majority of the people believe that Armstrong is clean. Does it make the small minority douchebags and creeps for expressing other opinions. Stone meet glass. Keep it on the topic without the slimeball antics.

Armstrong has had numerous allegations about drug use. Nobody is saying that it is hardly undeniable proof, but well worth an investigation. Some folks, myself included, are critical of Armstrong's denials because seems like each day more and more people that were previously associated with Armstrong or his team are speaking up and saying very specific things, not just general finger pointing. Doping is more widespread than you think and Armstrong may not be the perfect angel everyone thinks he is.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Mg1

*Lance must have one smooth supply chain if he is on EPO*



Ricky2 said:


> Oh so did all these people, old teamates, masseuses, team physicians, etc. say that Armstrong is now using a altitude tent? Ummmm, let's so. NOPE! It's the dope.
> 
> What's up with USPS dumping those actovegan baggies and syringes in a dumpster a few kms from their hotel at the Tour a couple years ago?


I must have missed the part where somebody witnessed Armstrong receiving / administering himself EPO. Syringes in a baggie? plenty of reasonable explanations that are much easier to explain than a doping scheme.

I wonder how, with all the scrutiny Lance has been under for the past 6 years, is he able to discreetly secure a supply of EPO, administer the proper dosage at just the right time to avoid blowing a test yet give him the goods to win, and not leave any tracks?

Sure, his support group is pretty tight, but I have a hard time believing he is able to pull it off for 6 years and never (dumpster incident aside [?]) have any leakage.

Maybe this is like Princess Di and Chaz. Perhaps 5 years from now we'll be watching Dateline OLN and hear the butler describe how he was able to arrange the entire scheme.


----------



## Ricky2

Mg1 said:


> I must have missed the part where somebody witnessed Armstrong receiving / administering himself EPO. Syringes in a baggie? plenty of reasonable explanations that are much easier to explain than a doping scheme.
> 
> I wonder how, with all the scrutiny Lance has been under for the past 6 years, is he able to discreetly secure a supply of EPO, administer the proper dosage at just the right time to avoid blowing a test yet give him the goods to win, and not leave any tracks?
> 
> Sure, his support group is pretty tight, but I have a hard time believing he is able to pull it off for 6 years and never (dumpster incident aside [?]) have any leakage.
> 
> Maybe this is like Princess Di and Chaz. Perhaps 5 years from now we'll be watching Dateline OLN and hear the butler describe how he was able to arrange the entire scheme.



Well, you said it. You missed it. The dumping of actovegan bags and syringes by a USPS team employee occurred years ago after one of the stages of the Tour. It was even caught on video camera. ABC sports played it. Velonews reported it. Funny, how just because you never heard about it, then it never existed.


----------



## HINCA

*do we need to really keep this up?*

I am a lance fan, not because he is lance, but because of how he approaches his season and because of all his accomplishments. it is really sad that we judge someone with any kind of proof. Would it be the same if it was Ullrich or Mayo or anyone beating the crap out of everyone in the Tour? didn't think so!
so Lemond say there are no miracles in cycling. so what does he calls coming back from such an accident and winning back to back Tours and a World Championship?? I guess some greats dont stand the idea of being cast aside.....
I do agree many people dont like Lance for whatever their reasons, but think about this. Where would be cycling in the US if it wasnt for Lance ( and I understant all that other like Lemond have done for the sport). The truth would come out if he is indeed doping, for now, Lance fan or not, enjoy the spectacle and be true cause Lance is KICKING ASS!!!!
I am new to this forum and it is always great to hear and express your opinion on the topics, but lets be objective and not let our own personal motivations blurr our judgement.


----------



## Live Steam

It would actually be quite easy and probably more profitable to replace them with bikes that have LAs name on them.


----------



## cyclejim

Ricky2 said:


> hahah! oops. missed that one. Yeah, I guess jim's quite a mind reader. Hey jim, if you're still following this, how many fingers am I holding up?


good one! can you guess how many I am holding up also, this is fun!


----------



## russw19

Lazywritter, why the personal attacks? Ricky2 is arguing against your point of view, and where you may not agree with it, I don't think attacking him is really the answer to him attacking your point of view. I am not going back thru and re-reading this entire silly thread, but I don't recall him ever taking personal shots at the people who don't like his opinion... just taking shots at what he thinks of Armstrong.


----------



## Inspector Gadget

*What is the bug up LeMond's saddle?*

Didn't this whole thing start years ago, when Lance was asked if he was going to be the "next Greg LeMond" and responded by saying no, he was going to be the "first Lance Armstrong?" That's the way I understand it. I suppose that at the time it seemed quite out of line and blasphemous. Afterall, here was this cocky,early 20's kid, who had just burst on the cycling scene, being compared to America's cycling god, for lack of a better term. I am under the impression that that comment turned MANY people off to him. Had I been into cycling at the time, I might have even become a Lance-hater. On the other hand, from Lance's perspective, no one really likes to be stacked up against others, particularly in their own moments of glory and certainly not in one's early 20's when wisdom and humility have not yet caught up to youthful vigor.
All that said, if that comment is, in fact the catalyst behind this whole brouhaha, it's high time LeMond (and even Lance) get over it and get on with their lives. Nothing can take Lemond's accomplishments away from him. Not even that comment or his rather unglorious implosion late in his career. And right now, barring REAL PROOF that Lance is doped, and not just wishful thinking, nothing should be taking away from his accomplishments either.


----------



## blackhat

*no it wouldnt.*



Live Steam said:


> It would actually be quite easy and probably more profitable to replace them with bikes that have LAs name on them.


disagree on both. it wouldn't be easy or cheap and I think you probably know that. theres more to it than replacing the decals. besides, there's nothing to suggest trek, lance, or anyone else has any interest in "armstrong" bikes either. Lemond is an established brand. why would they start from scratch just to please an athlete they sponsor. Burke's not an idiot.


----------



## Live Steam

It was sort of tongue in cheek, but you are correct. They would have to pay LA much more than they did Lemond, to use his name. ARM Armstrong Racing Machines :O) Armstrong Cycles :O) Something like this will happen. Lemond is hurting his brand. Trek cannot be happy about that. The backlash here is probably very representative of the US cycling community as a whole. I am sure Trek is looking at how they can influence the situation in an attempt to limit the damage. I'll bet another apology is forthcoming from Lemond. Doesn't he ever get tired of making them? He's a whiner and poor sport. He always was, even when he was paid to support Hinault.


----------



## chbarr

> It would actually be quite easy and probably more profitable to replace them with bikes that have LAs name on them.


I suspect that, in Trek's strategy, having Lemond as a separate brand does several good things that an Armstrong brand would not.

Since Armstrong's prominence was on Trek bikes, they would want to explicitly keep him associated with Trek, rather than an apparently-separate company. So, you're likely to see the "2010 Trek Madone SL Mk. 5 -- Designed with input from X-Time Tour de France Champion Lance Armstrong." This would keep the Armstrong name very close to Trek. 

Trek's secondary companies (Fisher, Klein, and Lemond) allow Trek to have a very wide range of bikes without creating something confusing for the main brand. Trek road bikes, for instance, have the 1000, 2000, 5000, and Madone lines, with 3 basic materials. Lemond introduces other materials (steel, titanium, combinations), alternate geometries (the "Lemond" geometry, compact geometry), etc. In total, many more choices are offered the consumer. 

Why not have them under the same name? So there isn't explicate competition within the line. "Why would I want a Maillot Jaune instead of a Madone?" You'd still have that, but it wouldn't quite be as cannibalistic. 

I suppose that Trek might shut that line down if backlash against Lemond reaches the point where it seriously impacts sales. I suspect that won't happen. I predict that Lemond's meeting with his corporate masters will go something along the lines of " you make a 'clarification' of your comments." Where "clarification" means "weasel out."

BTW: did anyone see that Hinault entered the fray? See the <a href="http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2004/jul04/jul19news3" target="_blank">second story</a>.


----------



## Trek_envy

*Does anyone know......*



Lazywriter said:


> It is not what Ricky says, it is how he says it because he is contrary in general (see other topics he posts on). As far as me meeting you "in the hood", I am from Brooklyn and grew up on the streets and live right outside of NYC. So don't tell me how tough you are cousine. You aren't too bright if you come to a conclusion of guilt based on the lack of evidence you present. Watch Lance's interviews on Charlie Rose that he has done and you will see him talk about this issue and the accusations. Does it mean he is clean? No, but there is no proof to the contrary that has "exposed" him yet and like he says in the interview, people just don't want to believe that he accomplishes things based on hard work so he must be on drugs.
> What about the countless hours of wind tunnel testing, training rides in the Alps and soley focusing on the Tour? Is EPO the sole reason for his success if he is indeed on it? Hell, is Barry Bonds the best HR hitter because of roids or does he have an incredible eye for the ball? It is well known that Lance uses hypoxic tents that have same effects as EPO. So without any evidence to support the accusations, your accusal is about as legitimate as me seeing you coming out of that gay bar on the West Side Highway. Wasn't that you? Can you prove it wasn't you? Not that there is anything wrong with it, but I swear it was you. Later tough guy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> QUOTE=Manhattan]I happen to disagree with some of the thoughts shared by some viewers. I also happen to share similar thoughts as Ricky, Russ, blackhat, Particle, etc. some others on this very post. Does that too make me a "douchebag" or "a$$hole" like Ricky and others as you like to throw around? I wish you were down in my old 'hood in NYC. I know you wouldn't say that to my face. You're style is when you disagree with someone about Lance and drugs, instead of sticking to the topic and having a discussion or even an argument about it, you throw around your immature antics and douchebag comments.
> 
> I think the majority of the people believe that Armstrong is clean. Does it make the small minority douchebags and creeps for expressing other opinions. Stone meet glass. Keep it on the topic without the slimeball antics.
> 
> Armstrong has had numerous allegations about drug use. Nobody is saying that it is hardly undeniable proof, but well worth an investigation. Some folks, myself included, are critical of Armstrong's denials because seems like each day more and more people that were previously associated with Armstrong or his team are speaking up and saying very specific things, not just general finger pointing. Doping is more widespread than you think and Armstrong may not be the perfect angel everyone thinks he is.


[/QUOTE]

What methods are used to test HCT by the UCI? I ask because I work for a blood testing company, and in the industry, there can be a huge error margin from test to test. Personally, I have tested myself on numerous occasions, and on the same day, from the same blood sample, just a different person testing, my HCT level varied from 43 to 48%. I guess I must be on EPO, because im so close to the level, and I certainly dont train like the pros do. Oddly enough as well, the instrument that my company sells reports a "normal" range of HCT from ~40% all the way up to 55%. 

Just curious.


----------



## CFBlue

*evidence?*

Unless LeMond has evidence, not just pure speculation, he should shut up. If he does have evidence, other than Lance's assocation with one person, he should tell us what it is. Having not done so, sounds to me like nothing but unfounded speculation that is harmful to the entire sport. I think it's a shame that some people feel they have to get attention tearing others down, especially when they have no (expressed) evidence to back it up. Some might call that slander.

If I were Lance, I'd be mad as hell, too. It's bad enough to have French press attacking with no evidence, but for a former champion to do so is outrageous. 

Unless LeMond has some evidence, he well deserves to have his business interests suffer horribly because of this shooting off his mouth. It's stupid on his part.


----------



## girishji

I saw sunday night's ESPN show about Lance, Lemond and drug issue. Considering that, in the recent past so many young "top" riders have died of heart and cirulation related illnesses, I think doping is rampant in cycling world including TdF. Also, I think 99.9% Lance Armstrong took dope. Say what you say, it is more likely (than not) that his comback story is a major BS (only because of drug use) hyped by commercial interests and US media. He is not worth it. Moving on...


----------



## moneyman

*Interesting quote from Tyler*

Tyler was interviewed in the Denver Post by Adam Schefter, a very respected sports journalist. Nothing controversial in the interview, but something very interesting.

_AS: What did you learn from Lance Armstrong?

TH: Probably to push myself in training. Before I met him, I thought I trained hard. But after I met him, I really learned how to train harder and to push myself more in training. When you're able to do that, you see the benefits. We were teammates in '98, but we started spending a lot of time together in '99, and I felt like I made a big step up in my results._

Tyler credits LA with working harder. Imagine that. Perhaps that is part of the reason that USPS has seen so many of their riders become leaders on other teams.


----------



## hrv

*To be honest, I really don't care*

Might be putting my foot in my mouth, but my admiration for Lance's on-the-bike accomplishments would not be diminished one iota, *even if he was found to have doped*. And if he did, so what if he lied about, what the hell else would he say??!!! Lighten up, it wouldn't be like he was some altar-boy molesting priest, would it?


----------



## CFBlue

*how about 60%?*

What methods are used to test HCT by the UCI? I ask because I work for a blood testing company, and in the industry, there can be a huge error margin from test to test. Personally, I have tested myself on numerous occasions, and on the same day, from the same blood sample, just a different person testing, my HCT level varied from 43 to 48%. I guess I must be on EPO, because im so close to the level, and I certainly dont train like the pros do. Oddly enough as well, the instrument that my company sells reports a "normal" range of HCT from ~40% all the way up to 55%. 

Just curious.[/QUOTE]

Remember when Pantani hit 60%? His doctor/witness testfied that it could have been from a cumlative effect of about 5 causes, like altitude training, etc., but I don't recall that he emphasized testing error. Are some tests more accurate?


----------



## CFBlue

*yet another contrast of LeMond and Hinault*

Eurosport: Amidst the doping innuendo that is continually swirling around 
cycling, some have made the connection between Armstrong and the medications 
he was allowed to take - and may currently still be taking - because of his 
cancer. 

Bernard Hinault: Yeah, I've heard that and here's what I have to say to that 
bunch of @ssh0les: I wish you just one thing: That you have the same 
sickness. That you have one foot in the grave. Then you'll see how much 
you'll want to live. How much you'll want to do what you love and do it to 
it's maximum.

http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/V4/L0/S18/E6083/sport_Lng0_Spo18_Evt6083_Sto607341.shtml


----------



## Live Steam

What a quote from that interview. This one is great!


> Armstrong's goal is the Tour de France and he's right to choose it. Why? Because he can win it. The others, frankly, must be a little stupid to focus on the Tour because they can't win it. Maybe they should focus on another race, where Armstrong isn't, like the Tours of Italy or Spain.


----------



## Live Steam

Uh oh! Now you've done it! This could get ugly :O)


----------



## russw19

DougSloan said:


> Remember when Pantani hit 60%? His doctor/witness testfied that it could have been from a cumlative effect of about 5 causes, like altitude training, etc., but I don't recall that he emphasized testing error. Are some tests more accurate?


Doug, are you referring to when he got tossed from the Giro in 1999? If so, he only hit 52% and was tested at the finish of a stage less than 30 minutes after he got off the bike. It was hot that day, and his team doctor claimed it was a combo of the heat and him not being able to hydrate on the climb properly. The doctor claimed it was due to dehydration that his result was too high. And independent tests showed his hemocrit back at 48% the next morning. Could he have drank 10 gallons of water or gotten a IV drip to rehydrate and lower it overnight... sure. But it is surely possible that the doctor's explanation for the high hemocrit was valid.

I am not trying to say I know for a fact that Pantani was doped or wasn't, but the excuse they gave as soon as the test results came back were plausible. Also, it's worth noting that Pantani was tested twice in that Giro earlier and passed both of those tests. 

Was he doped and just pushing the limit a little too high... we will never know. But could he have in fact actually been innocent on that day? Possible.

Russ


----------



## Ricky2

russw19 said:


> Doug, are you referring to when he got tossed from the Giro in 1999? If so, he only hit 52% and was tested at the finish of a stage less than 30 minutes after he got off the bike. It was hot that day, and his team doctor claimed it was a combo of the heat and him not being able to hydrate on the climb properly. The doctor claimed it was due to dehydration that his result was too high. And independent tests showed his hemocrit back at 48% the next morning. Could he have drank 10 gallons of water or gotten a IV drip to rehydrate and lower it overnight... sure. But it is surely possible that the doctor's explanation for the high hemocrit was valid.
> 
> I am not trying to say I know for a fact that Pantani was doped or wasn't, but the excuse they gave as soon as the test results came back were plausible. Also, it's worth noting that Pantani was tested twice in that Giro earlier and passed both of those tests.
> 
> Was he doped and just pushing the limit a little too high... we will never know. But could he have in fact actually been innocent on that day? Possible.
> 
> Russ



One of the symptoms of EPO use is marked dehydration. Manzano detailed other ways to dilute the blood a little to lower hematocrit levels. That's why IV drips should not be allowed at all on Tour.


----------



## Ricky2

*Outside the Lines: ESPN's version different from Armstrong*

Obviously the Lance Fan Club did not want to watch the 30 minute ESPN special Outside The Lines covering the alleged drug abuse of Armstrong and USPS. Lemond is getting villified for standing up for clean cycling. It has NOTHING to do with whether or not he has "proof" because his statements do not say that Armstrong is using drugs, only that Armstrong has avoided the issue and claims. Lemond is right. Greg says on the show that he was critical of Dr. Ferrari long before Lance was even racing for USPS, so for Armstrong to call Greg and threaten him. That's just plain wrong! Armstrong is the one that made the call, not Greg.


----------



## russw19

Ricky2 said:


> One of the symptoms of EPO use is marked dehydration. Manzano detailed other ways to dilute the blood a little to lower hematocrit levels. That's why IV drips should not be allowed at all on Tour.


Well, like I said, I am not really trying to make an argument that Pantani was clean OR doped, but one of the symptoms of racing up a damn mountian in 85 degree heat is marked dehydration. 

I only wanted to point out that the doctor's reasoning for the possibility of the 52% was completely plausible. Only Pantani and maybe a doctor or two knows if he was on EPO or not. Let's just leave this one at that. No sense starting this whole argument up again centering on Pantani now instead of Armstrong.


----------



## Ricky2

*They gave L the drip and not just for dehydration*



russw19 said:


> Well, like I said, I am not really trying to make an argument that Pantani was clean OR doped, but one of the symptoms of racing up a damn mountian in 85 degree heat is marked dehydration.
> 
> I only wanted to point out that the doctor's reasoning for the possibility of the 52% was completely plausible. Only Pantani and maybe a doctor or two knows if he was on EPO or not. Let's just leave this one at that. No sense starting this whole argument up again centering on Pantani now instead of Armstrong.



No, you're right. I remember Pantani tested in the low 50s, so the claim that he was 60 was just pure bull. I was commenting that EPO use can also cause marked dehydration. And if they want a clean Tour (and I'm not sure they do) then they'll find a way to ban IV drips also. And if a rider uses an IV drip then he's out of the race. Just IMO.

The new dynEPO is so advanced. Its scary. Completely untestable through both blood and urine tests is what I heard. Though can can still do their so-called "testing" of the hematocrit. But, I think we all know how reliable those tests are!


----------



## dagger

Here my bullets on point:

1. Criticisizing Dr. Ferrari is Fair based on the facts. Maybe Lance's loyalty is getting the better of him on this issue of association. This is Lemond's point. Lemond was trying to advise Lance in order to not let that association taint his record. 

2. Facts are that Lance has set a precedence that has never been seen before in training, strategy, and equipment. There is no doubt of this. *EPO use or not he could not have achieved his victories without the intense micromanagement of every detail in preparing for this race. * He was able to control a lot of factors that every team and rider has not been able to. LA hater should be able to concede this.


----------



## ttug

*Easy Doping Solution*

For everyone here who of course has the insight,medical knowledge and personal day to day feedback on these athletes,lets just cut the [email protected] shall we? You dont have the knowledge, class, dedication or ability that these riders do. So stick it.

If you hate the ethic or moral of folks who might or might not dope

DONT WATCH THE SPORT

RIDE YOUR BIKE TO A FAR AWAY PLACE

IF YOU CAN GET A NEWSPAPER OR GET TO THE INTERNET, RIDE FARTHER

DONT COME BACK 

So what if these guys juice? I dont care. In fact, they could have THG is OK by me jerseys and I love EPO enema smoothies for all I really care. If you honestly are so naive and needy to think that total strangers OWE YOU a fine moral example than I suggest minding your own fvcking business and dont watch the sport.

I am certain that all of you here would hold up great in the mighty moral crucible you want. Everyone right? The bar of perfection is rather high and I assure you, nobody here including myself is there yet

Whats next, the Barbie doll is too buxom for you and you think Barbie is setting a bad example as a blond chick with a big rack???????


----------



## atpjunkie

*well said*

I've just reread this whole post for giggles
A) it wasn't Pantani's 60 that set the sirens off, it was the crash to 16 or so in the hospital the day after and the miraculous 'recovery' of his H-Crit level once his team doctors took over

B) as I've stated before Hyperbaric chambers work, especially when you sleep in them while still training @ sea level. this boosts the RBC's and allows you to then optimize them by training in an oxygen rich atmosphere
but
You have to sleep in a tent, you have to have it set up and you have to use it. To use these tents takes a certain amount of humility and discipline (read :work) which IMHO Biarittz living, disco going, model shagging lifestyle that Mr Millar lacks. the thing is
ther are other ways to increase your H-Crit, EPO is just the easiest. So it is the choice of the IMHO lazy.

C) so since USPS put 2 riders in the top five (even while Ace was 'sick' in the Alps he held on to a top 5, not bad for a Dom), a number in the top 50, had most of their team left on the final climbs of the Mtn stages when most Captains had already been dropped, put in a dominant TTT and scored well individually on the ITT's
we can discern
C1) that LA has given his dope techniques to his squad
or
C2) that LA has passed his training/ discipline/ equipment and nutrition etc.. methods to his squad

now given that no USPS rider was or has been busted for High H-Crit, masking agents or EPO (while other pros have) which choice seems more plausible and logical? You have 9 riders being tested, it is common for 'cheaters' to send 'clean doms' first so their GC guys can dilute w/ IV while they await testing. Given Postals performance there is very little chance they could have diluted an entire team while the Docs waited.

I'm no super fan, no basher, just trying to 'think' things through. If the UCI really wants to test, set up a suprise roadblock in the middle of a stage. test the entire peloton and send them on their way.


----------



## TrailNut

*Lemond: prove it or shove it*

i'd like to kick his ass: a hard reverse elbow to his motor mouth... of course it's just a nice thought.
sadly he's doing himself more harm than i wish i could to him for sounding like such a loser for a former champion i used to admire. too bad one of his friends can't smak him in the head to shut the heck up

now i'd never buy a Lemond bike, but perhaps that Simione (sp.) pro might


----------



## Coolhand

Wow this thread back from the dead huh?

Well in any event, Greg has more then a little of the green-eyed monster going. He has been dropped as the top US rider in history. He has been dropped as the top pro rider/influence at Trek (who bought his failing bike company). He has been dropped from the discussion of greatest Tour riders, as he was not in the "Class of Five". He had dropped off the cycling media's radar, known more for winning his last Tour with vastly superior TT equipment then anything else. Also, at the Trek 100 where I saw him he was, ummm, _muy grande_, ummm _super sized_, ummm how can I put this-- fat. 

Faced with rapidly fading personal and professional propects due to the success of Lance and the new generation of other Americans, it is not surprising that Lemond has acted so petty and vindictive. Disappointing, but not surprising.

I was a bit surprised that Andy Hampsted stuck up for Lemond's mud slinging- well until I saw that they were business partners. Nice Andy- way to disappoint the few remaining people who know/care who you were once.


----------



## dagger

*Roadblocks hmm......*



> I'm no super fan, no basher, just trying to 'think' things through. If the UCI really wants to test, set up a suprise roadblock in the middle of a stage. test the entire peloton and send them on their way.



I like that idea of setting up a roadblock ..like they set up roadblocks to catch drunks. Or how about this: awarding time bonus points to people who volounteer to stop during a race or stage and give a blood and urine sample. That would be hilarious...great observation. Best solution yet!


----------



## Marc Dana

*Lemond U lose*

After hearing Greg Lemond's negative doping remarks about Lance, I'm embarrassed to be seen on my Lemond (Poprad). Got the new Cannondale Six13. My lemond is gettin trashed. You lose Greg. Marc


----------



## Italian Style

*I don't blame you*

you got a much better bike. but i believe lemond was telling the truth.


----------



## weiwentg

Coolhand said:


> . Also, at the Trek 100 where I saw him he was, ummm, _muy grande_, ummm _super sized_, ummm how can I put this-- fat.


Lemond, fat? perhaps, but look at Eddy Merckx. he's fat. and he looks damn happy.
plus Lemond has some mitochondrial disorder (or some other medical condition) that makes it pretty hard for him to exercise, I hear. 

has LA Confidential been published in English yet?


----------



## Coolhand

weiwentg said:


> Lemond, fat? perhaps, but look at Eddy Merckx. he's fat. and he looks damn happy.
> plus Lemond has some mitochondrial disorder (or some other medical condition) that makes it pretty hard for him to exercise, I hear.
> 
> has LA Confidential been published in English yet?


Check his condition again- he rode that day. Still was pretty fast for the first 20 miles- he had that smooth power delivery stroke of a pro. But he looks nothing like he did back in the day. 

Point taken on Eddy, but then again Eddy doesn't come off as a petuant has-been. Palmares, bike company and current repuation wise- Eddy is light years beyond Lemond, who seems intent on lashing out while his career circles the drain. Hey Greg, try looking in the mirror. Given that Trek now has 3 lines producing road bikes, one wonders how long before the Lemond brand is as dead as Lemond's endorsement chances. As Lance has a lot to do with the popularity of Trek road line (and the subsequent dimunition of the Lemond brand's overall worth to the company), it will be amusing when they pull the plug on the last legacy of Lemond's career.


----------



## R.Rice

What I find most ammusing as I am watching this thread unfold is the difference in the two camps.On one hand you have the more reasonable "innocent until proven guilty" and on the other you have the conspiracy theory nuts "he has to be doping because of _______" or "He can get away with it because of __________"

Look it is just this simple to me,innocent until PROVEN guilty.Some of you people act as if the people administering these alleged drugs are so far ahead of the people testing for them that they can hide any use of banned substances.I am not going to pretend,like some others in this thread,that I am a doctor.However,If a guy was known to be a freak of nature from the age of 16 and extremely gifted doesn't that account for something?

Lance has access to incredible technoligical resources,amazing coaches,a ridiculous training ethic and last but not least the genetics.Call me crazy.Maybe that accounts for something.

However,this is all coming from,including myself,a bunch of people on the internet that couldn't complete one day of the TDF with a lead group much less win it 6 times.

Just my $.02.


----------



## mtnwing

*The Road Side Pour*



dagger said:


> I like that idea of setting up a roadblock ..like they set up roadblocks to catch drunks. Or how about this: awarding time bonus points to people who volounteer to stop during a race or stage and give a blood and urine sample. That would be hilarious...great observation. Best solution yet!



1) The whole peleton already stops for nature breaks . . . so the idea of realtime capture is seems both fan friendly and humourously ingenious.

2) If hearsay and inuoendo were a crime, we'd all be doin time!

3) Here's a hypothetical for the debators . . . if LA is on the big D (which there's been no real proof here after two pages of board jibberish), then is the entire rest of the peleton clean? and if not why can't the guys at the same bar (with or without D) beat him? 

Is the suggestion/implication that he's better at this too? 

what about the guys that are confirmed to have the big D like Millar? why aren't they winning tours and stomping lance since we know they are using it - aren't the guys with the same tactics (if you want to believe the hearsay) on an even plane? what's their excuse for being slow?

4) How does Fignon feel about Lemond's aero bars and aero suit? At the time Lemond was pretty much the "only guy" with this advantage. Yeah LA has some better equipment than the average joe peleton rider, but the aero advantage lemond had was staggering back then vs the competition. (For the record I think Lemond just outsmarted the competition which should be viewed as fair and square, but isn't that what Lance has been doing too with his equipment, training, team assembly, preperation, etc, etc) . Some might argue this kind of technology break through was a much bigger advantage than some blood doping where the bar is even and limited to the 50 measure. and thus should have been banned at that race on bike inspection.

5) For those who watched the "Lance Chronicles" on OLN, it's pretty clear he's got his preparation down to a science and he's driving the train.

How many other Tour riders this year worked to designed a skin suit with optimized placement of the pinned number plate to reduce drag?

What other Tour rider road Alp D'uez as many times as LA leading up to the 04 race?

How many riders in the tour truly had the team support or training flexibility to focus on one and only one race?

Who has a equal or stronger team at the starting line than USPS? (I would argue here that the team award at the end of the tour isn't an accurate representation of the "strongest" team, since the team that sacrifices for one rider won't often have the strongest team finishes to win these points). 

6) In defense of Lemond, free speach rules! . . . but where's the proof?! Innocent till proven guilty is equally great law and right now Lemond seems to be the one with hot air unless he can back up the smack. Let's take the heat off Lance and turn the heat on Lemond . . . SHOW ME the FUNNY if it truly exists. Otherwise shut the trapp. The concept of keeping the sport clean is good but to attack publicly without hard evidence? I don't get it?

7) Obviously Altitude tents work to help raise Hemocrit. It's hard to believe top athletes aren't monitoring their Hemo levels and trying to "fairly" increase performance via other techniques not yet banned. And it's also no secret that being close to 50 is a good thing if you want to win. So as long as all the riders are tested and below the limit, it sounds to me like the bar is even on this item, and we can all move on to analyzing the other reasons why LA is kickin it in six tours straight . . . the real question

better "birth genetics" (same intangible that made Babe Ruth, T Woods, James Stewart, J McGrath, Dave Mirra, Michael Jordan, Walter Payton or Cindy Crawford special and dominant in their chosen discipline)
better preparation
better team
better equipment
better focus
better place to raise loyal zealot army of tour fans (texas)
better resources to win


8) as for Genetics - why is it so hard to believe some humans are born with just a little more (mental or physical) Aren't there things you find yourself doing better than others without trying?

And it's not like we haven't seen dominant athletes before in other sports. Why can't lance be legit and fall into this catetory? Is it really that hard to believe. Maybe it's Greg's fault because it's two dominant Americans and Lightning has struck twice!

9) as for the naysayers . . . ask other successful people if they find others taking unfair swings at them and you'l find the answer to be "yes". That's part of human nature for folks to try and knock the top dog off the top rung of the ladder. So it shouldn't be so surprising that some folks have spoken out against LA. Again, where's the hard proof? Back it up. Lance has had to back it up day in and day out as the "MOST tested athlete in the world". Not only has he continually shown clean results, he has continued to "STOMP" the competition. I'd like to see the naysayer's held to this same level. No one's showing up on Greg's door or any of these other rumour generators once a week asking them to show real evidence (or pee in a cup). 

10) I'm still a huge fan of both Lemond and Lance as riders! Both have more heart to win then nearly anyone in the world. Perhaps it's this inner drive and passion when dropped in the same fishbowl is like two fighting fish . . . . it's just a shame we all can't get along better.

-mtnwing
www.roadbikes.net
www.mountainbikes.net
www.carbonbicycles.com


----------

