# 1989 Tour de France time trial...Lemond rocked!



## skygodmatt (May 24, 2005)

Do you guys remember the 1989 Lemond time trial in the Tour?
He averaged almost 35 mph! That's gotta be hard to average. It set a world record. Pretty darn impressive since back in 1989 they didn't have wind tunnel testing, special fabrics, carbon fiber, or any of the trick time saving componets. 

I don't care how you cut it. Lemond rocked.

What I am wondering is how long the record stood before someone broke it?

Matt P.
:idea:


----------



## Jim Nazium (Feb 3, 2004)

skygodmatt said:


> What I am wondering is how long the record stood before someone broke it?


The record (highest average speed in a Tour de France time trial) stood until Dave Zabriske broke it in 2005, which means it stood for 15 years despite all the advances in equipment and testing. However, the '89 TT was really short (25 km) and at least part of it was downhill, so it's not a fair comparison to most other TDF TTs.

That said, for my money it was one of the most impressive feats in any sporting event, ever. He had a 55 second deficit to Fignon which everyone thought was insurmountable.


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

Your dam right he rocked. Does ayone know the results fo his test that day? Did they test him like they test Floyd and Lance?


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

All the 90s are a drug-induced blur. In the long-run, I sort of think that there will be an EPO asterick alongside the 90s in cycling, just like baseball's "drug era."


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Pablo said:


> All the 90s are a drug-induced blur. In the long-run, I sort of think that there will be an EPO asterick alongside the 90s in cycling, just like baseball's "drug era."


Except in cycling it's all relative (e.g. wins come against others with likely the same access to dope) or so highly variable (wind, technology changes, net elevation change, etc. greatly effect TT performance) that it's hard to make comparisons.

It would seem the most objective comparison would be climb records, many of which were set during the era of unrestrained EPO use. Even then you've got take into account where the climb was in the race (e.g. Pantani vs. Armstrong's Alp d'Huez time), wind, etc.


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

You got it backwards... baseball has a much more even doping field then cycling.

Minimum salary in MLB is almost $400,000. Everyone in MLB can afford the dope if they want to take it. Even reading Jose Canseco's book it was not a problem affording dope on a minor league salary, he and McGuire were juicing before they hit the big leagues and started making lots of money.

IIRC lots of pro cyclists make well under $100,000 and the drugs that they take are far more expensive then steroids. EPO for example is extremely expensive. Up to $500/dose. That alone probably means it's use in the Peloton was lower then we might think. Domestiques, etc.. were probably not on it.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

benInMA said:


> EPO for example is extremely expensive. Up to $500/dose. That alone probably means it's use in the Peloton was lower then we might think. Domestiques, etc.. were probably not on it.


Except according to the dopers themselves EPO was the affordable drug (and I would argue the indispensable one if you wanted to compete), it was (is) the blood transfusions that required lots of money and were only accessable by the big riders with deep pockets. And ironically enough, the doping technique with the most security since it was and still is undetectable.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

If you go to youtube.com and put 1989 tour de france in the search, you can pull up the video replay of that event. Very cool to watch.


----------



## benInMA (Jan 22, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Except according to the dopers themselves EPO was the affordable drug (and I would argue the indispensable one if you wanted to compete), it was (is) the blood transfusions that required lots of money and were only accessable by the big riders with deep pockets. And ironically enough, the doping technique with the most security since it was and still is undetectable.


You may be right but that doesn't change anything I said. If EPO is cheaper then blood transfusions it's still 10x more expensive then steroids & pro cyclists still earn less then baseball & football players, so the effort to dope effectively is still harder for the cyclist.

e.x. I just looked up nandrolone.. a cycle of that is $56/month. Pretty sure I've seen that steroid referenced on weight lifting sites before.

They all seem to like HgH though and that is ridiculously expensive.. $30k/yr?


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

benInMA said:


> They all seem to like HgH though and that is ridiculously expensive.. $30k/yr?


And of questionable effectiveness in healthy people, but undetectable so why not (at least when it comes to pro athletes)?


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Except in cycling it's all relative (e.g. wins come against others with likely the same access to dope) or so highly variable (wind, technology changes, net elevation change, etc. greatly effect TT performance) that it's hard to make comparisons.
> 
> It would seem the most objective comparison would be climb records, many of which were set during the era of unrestrained EPO use. Even then you've got take into account where the climb was in the race (e.g. Pantani vs. Armstrong's Alp d'Huez time), wind, etc.


Good point, although I was not really thinking about about objective statistics. I do see your point that it is relative. Food for thought. 

I was instead referring more generally to a cloud of illegtimacy. For example, when you see Bartoli ride Jaja off his wheel without attacking in Liege. Sure, it's all relative if everyone was doing it, but it still seems tainted in my mind.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

crossboy said:


> Your dam right he rocked. Does ayone know the results fo his test that day? Did they test him like they test Floyd and Lance?


Yes, he was tested and the results were negative. Drug testing in cycling started in the 60's. 

Since you brought up Lance's test's I assume you are referring to the lack of an approved EPO test for much of lance's career, and the fact that when there finally was a test available that 6 of his samples from the 99 tour tested positive.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

bigpinkt said:


> Yes, he was tested and the results were negative. Drug testing in cycling started in the 60's.


Pretty much everyone agrees that prior to WADA, testing in cycling was a joke and the further back you go the bigger the joke. You basically had to do something incredibly stupid and not have the right connections to fail a drug test and not get out of it. Great stories in Willy Voet's book about the same doctors doping riders who were in charge of the doping contols! Used to be easy to swap urine, etc. Famous story about one poor rider who substituted a mechanic's urine for his own, only to fail the dope test because the mechanic had popped some speed but forgot about it.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

Pablo said:


> For example, when you see Bartoli ride Jaja off his wheel without attacking in Liege. Sure, it's all relative if everyone was doing it, but it still seems tainted in my mind.


In my mind I just think "when wasn't it tainted". Post WWII the riders openly used amphetamines, they really only had to start keeping that under the table once Simpson keeled over on the Ventoux. Voet's book basically portrays most of the big riders of the 80's as speed freaks. Taking injections ("charges" I think he called them) for meaningless post-tour criteriums because they couldn't get by without the stuff.


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

Again, good point. Perhaps it's my relative youth but the EPO era seems different, if only slightly, as evidenced by the sudden acceleration of the peloton. I agree, however, that it's a matter of degree.


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

Lance made more in 1 year than Lemond made in his entire career. Plus, he got a celebrity rock star status and he was baggin Sheryl Crow. No wonder Lemond has bad feelings about the guy. He loved Floyd, but what does Floyd have anyomore. Nothing. He!!, he is sending me emails to try to get money from me for his legal defense. LOL

I guess the check he sent me after signing a big deal with Phonak got lost in the mail. Better yet, Tugboat, or whatever's Tylers dog's name was must have eaten it.


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

The true measure of any cyclist is undoubtedly the number of rock stars he fraternizes with and the amount of money he made. Give me a break.


----------



## crossboy (Jan 9, 2007)

Pablo said:


> The true measure of any cyclist is undoubtedly the number of rock stars he fraternizes with and the amount of money he made. Give me a break.


Uhhh, why not. Oh yeah, he did win some races in his career.


----------



## MellowDramatic (Jun 8, 2006)

I smell a troll.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

Me thinks that Greg Lemond started this thread himself.


----------



## skygodmatt (May 24, 2005)

*I posted this thread.....*

...and it's interesting that the focus shifted from a fast time trial....to talking about dope. 

I'm just saying in 1989 there were some good riders and it showed.

Oh, btw...I am not affiliated with Greg Lemond. 

Matt P.


----------



## coinstar2k (Apr 17, 2007)

It is even more amazing considering he wore a helmet that was like a parachute, and his top competition didn't wear one.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

coinstar2k said:


> It is even more amazing considering he wore a helmet that was like a parachute, and his top competition didn't wear one.


Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't that the one where he used the Aero bars and no one else did? You'd think that gave him a pretty big advantage regardless.


----------



## Pablo (Jul 7, 2004)

I've seen pictures of his helmet and I'm not so convinced that it would create that much more drag than Fignon's ponytail.


----------



## coinstar2k (Apr 17, 2007)

They calculated that the bars gave him about a 1 minute advantage, but the helmet was an overall drag of over 3 minutes. This info comes straight from him when he visited my bike shop a few years ago.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't that the one where he used the Aero bars and no one else did? You'd think that gave him a pretty big advantage regardless.


The bars were definatly something that other riders had access too they were however new and in the eyes of the peloton not proven.

I have read that Figon's DS tried to file a protest after the race that Lemonds bars gave him am unsporting advantage but since Fingon had tried and rejected using them that was not upheld.


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

Dwayne Barry said:


> Maybe I'm mistaken but isn't that the one where he used the Aero bars and no one else did? You'd think that gave him a pretty big advantage regardless.


It was the year he used aero bars the first time. They were added that morning and his only experience riding them was a few blocks. If you see any pics from the time trial you can see the red Coca Cola can shims holding the bars in place. Also his position was not so aero, he had the bars way too high. It was an amazing comeback for sure.


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

lancezneighbor said:


> It was the year he used aero bars the first time. They were added that morning and his only experience riding them was a few blocks. If you see any pics from the time trial you can see the red Coca Cola can shims holding the bars in place. Also his position was not so aero, he had the bars way too high. It was an amazing comeback for sure.


The last stage was not his first time with the bars, he rode them in the earlier TT as well. They also had been used by other teams, Like 7-11, as well.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2004)

*uhmmmm...*



lancezneighbor said:


> It was the year he used aero bars the first time. They were added that morning and his only experience riding them was a few blocks. If you see any pics from the time trial you can see the red Coca Cola can shims holding the bars in place. Also his position was not so aero, he had the bars way too high. It was an amazing comeback for sure.


Didn't Lance move? So you have to change your name now? lol.


----------



## JSR (Feb 27, 2006)

I thought it was cool that at the finish Fignon fell off his bike curled up in the fetal position and started crying.

Have you ever seen anything remotely like that in this sport or any other? Talk about destroying your competition, that was a total punking.

JSR


----------



## lancezneighbor (May 4, 2002)

dagger said:


> Didn't Lance move? So you have to change your name now? lol.


Well actually I moved too. I live in NM now (my true home, I was just on a 14 year vacation in Austin), I used to live on the same street as Mr. Armstrong. So is there a way to change names?


----------



## Jim Nazium (Feb 3, 2004)

JSR said:


> I thought it was cool that at the finish Fignon fell off his bike curled up in the fetal position and started crying.
> 
> Have you ever seen anything remotely like that in this sport or any other? Talk about destroying your competition, that was a total punking.
> 
> JSR


Yup, and remember, Fignon finished second in that TT. He beat 150 or so other guys, and then gets beat by almost a full minute over 25 km.

pwned!


----------



## teamcinzano (Jun 10, 2006)

lancezneighbor said:


> It was the year he used aero bars the first time. They were added that morning and his only experience riding them was a few blocks. If you see any pics from the time trial you can see the red Coca Cola can shims holding the bars in place. Also his position was not so aero, he had the bars way too high. It was an amazing comeback for sure.


I thought his position looked pretty good, actually. If you look at the return of high-handed positions last year and this (landis, now levi and about 10 other guys), it almost looks like people are returning to that older position. His back is pretty flat, his head it in line with it, and obviously it was also a powerful position.


----------



## jhamlin38 (Oct 29, 2005)

I hadn't really watched any pro cycling. mostly due to lack of coverage in the US. However, that was one of the greatest victories I've ever seen. Next to Doug Flutie's bomb, Christian Laetner's last second shot, the Cal/Stanford game. 
It's a shame that LeMond is so negative about Lance's accomplishments. Unfortunately, the entire 15 years (1985-2000) will be an era with a virtual "*" next to all accomplishments. 
As for doping. Probably all of the top riders, busted or not, did it. It didn't stop me from watching and wanting more and more coverage. Nor did it make the races any less interesting. The sport is a serious mess today. its FUBAR'ed.


----------



## Dwayne Barry (Feb 16, 2003)

jhamlin38 said:


> Unfortunately, the entire 15 years (1985-2000) will be an era with a virtual "*" next to all accomplishments.


'85 is far too early. EPO is the one drug that matters and I don't think was made until '89 or so and didn't find it's way into the peloton until the early 90s and probably didn't get into widespread use until the mid-90s.

If you're talking about putting an asterisk next to any performance influenced by doping then there is no reason to start in '85 rather than all the way back at the beginning certainly be post-WWII amphetamine use had become common.

Some entertaining quotes:

When asked if he took la bomba, as the amphetamine pills were called, the Italian champion Fausto Coppi, who dominated the sport in the late '40s and '50s, replied, "Only when I have to." Pressed to define when that was, he acknowledged, "Almost all the time."

Tommy Simpson (ironically) summed up the riders' attitude toward drugs: "If it takes ten to kill you, I'll take nine."

Five-time Tour champion Jacques Anquetil "You'd have to be an imbecile or a hypocrite to imagine that a professional cyclist who rides 235 days a year can hold himself together without stimulants."


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

jhamlin38 said:


> It's a shame that LeMond is so negative about Lance's accomplishments. /QUOTE]
> 
> Greg is not saying anything that thousands of other cycling fans, journalists, riders, support people have said for years about Lance....it just sounds worse coming from him


----------



## atpjunkie (Mar 23, 2002)

*spot on dwayne*



Dwayne Barry said:


> '85 is far too early. EPO is the one drug that matters and I don't think was made until '89 or so and didn't find it's way into the peloton until the early 90s and probably didn't get into widespread use until the mid-90s.
> 
> If you're talking about putting an asterisk next to any performance influenced by doping then there is no reason to start in '85 rather than all the way back at the beginning certainly be post-WWII amphetamine use had become common.
> 
> ...


the epo era seemed to start in my memory around 92 at the earliest. what is sad is that casts a spectre over Mig.

there's one of Fignon's team mates who still cries when he gets to a certain intersection in Paris "This place here, is where Fignon lost my bonus"


----------



## bigpinkt (Jul 20, 2006)

atpjunkie said:


> there's one of Fignon's team mates who still cries when he gets to a certain intersection in Paris "This place here, is where Fignon lost my bonus"


:lol: :lol:


----------

