Professional Cycling For the Fans - Bad Move Greg

This (http://www.velonews.com/article/83679/) qualifies as exercising incredibly poor judgment, IMO.

Greg is a dick. Jealous if you ask me.

I'll even bet he was using something back in his day.

Greg LeMond was the last clean winner of the Tour de France period. He probably shouldn't have confronted Armstrong at Interbike, but he's angry and Armstrong is a fraud...

Lemond is turning into a stalker. He has spent the last 8 years officially staking his claim that Armstrong was doping. Well....he hasnt proven it and now he is bordering on just being a pathological stalker. Its time Lemond gave proof or shut up and let it go. Is Lemond going to spend his entire life stalking Armstrong with unproven allegations ?
Lemond is a 3 time Tour De France winner but now he has turned into an 8 time stalker loser.
I suggest Lemond show some dignity and walk away from this obsession.

Lemond is turning into a stalker. He has spent the last 8 years officially staking his claim that Armstrong was doping. Well....he hasnt proven it and now he is bordering on just being a pathological stalker. Its time Lemond gave proof or shut up and let it go. Is Lemond going to spend his entire life stalking Armstrong with unproven allegations ?
Lemond is a 3 time Tour De France winner but now he has turned into an 8 time stalker loser.
I suggest Lemond show some dignity and walk away from this obsession.

Wow, when you have nothing you have to make personal attacks. LeMond loves the sport and doesn't want to see it go down the toilet and have more tragedies.

I understand that you like to worship Lance, but it took a while to topple Marion Jones too....

Wow, when you have nothing you have to make personal attacks. LeMond loves the sport and doesn't want to see it go down the toilet and have more tragedies.

I understand that you like to worship Lance, but it took a while to topple Marion Jones too....

are you saying that is lemond's objectibve? to topple LA? if so, he has failed, and will continue to due so. do you really think his presence at ystrdy's press conf was...sensible? facts aside, he has demonstrated clearly that he is not exactly stable. we all have our demons, he wears his on his sleeve, and uses his name and $$ to force his issues. and its tiresome and its obvious and its sad and he must, given the "depth" of his study, and knowledge, recognize that he has failed and continues to do so. i don't worship LA. i love the way he raced his bike. period. at least on its face, he is using his name and racing to bring attention to cancer. if he is motivated otherly, that is unknown to anyone but him, in addition to being completely understandable. how would any of us know what it means to be an athlete at that level? we wouldn't. lemond is a piker and kind of like a big angry baby who just howls at anyone who will listen. i would say he left his dignity behind long ago. what toilet exactly has the sport gone down? doping? big deal. so yeah, racers dope. so what? some do, some don't, some die, though there is little related evidence of deaths and doping in recent years. the races continue, the sport eveolves as much as it stays the same. love it, or don't.

Can any of you enlighten on the history of this confrontation, for those of us who have not followed it? I know LA had some allegations from the French(?), and he was cleared. I never heard from Lemond until this news flash. It is a flash, to me, and I think to many people who don't follow TDF.

It seems Lemond is convinced LA is dirty. But even if, is this the way, the time, to address it? Wouldn't the smart and classy move be to let someone else prove it?

I never believed Pete Rose or Barry Bonds; they struck me as poor liars (huge Pete Rose fan; I WANTED to believe). But I am inclined to believe Armstrong, from what I have seen and heard from him. What does Lemond have on him, if anything? You all might have some strong opinions, but what are the facts, if any, surrounding this? thanks

Can any of you enlighten on the history of this confrontation, for those of us who have not followed it? I know LA had some allegations from the French(?), and he was cleared. I never heard from Lemond until this news flash. It is a flash, to me, and I think to many people who don't follow TDF.

It seems Lemond is convinced LA is dirty. But even if, is this the way, the time, to address it? Wouldn't the smart and classy move be to let someone else prove it?

I never believed Pete Rose or Barry Bonds; they struck me as poor liars (huge Pete Rose fan; I WANTED to believe). But I am inclined to believe Armstrong, from what I have seen and heard from him. What does Lemond have on him, if anything? You all might have some strong opinions, but what are the facts, if any, surrounding this? thanks

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond)explains some of the history. Hard to believe it's all motivated by Lemond's love of the sport, yet Lemond seems to have some anecdotal evidence (and maybe more) of Armstrong's guilt, i.e, threats, secrecy. And doing press conferences with, and putting on your payroll, the expert who's going to monitor you? Lemond may look like a wacko here but someone's gotta ask the tough questions.

I really think it's time for Lemond to move on. We cannot say for certain that Lance was guilty of doping without elevating our own opinions to the status of fact, which is arrogance. But I do think that Lemond is very insecure about himself (perhaps as a result of childhood sexual abuse experiences) and needs to let go of this.

Greg, if your listening you need to let go of this because it is obvious that it is turning you into a less than whole person and will eat you up. You need to find yourself something healthy that you can do outside of cycling and then just go ride your bike to express your love of cycling.

If Lance could have found 10 people that would testify that you used EPO then obviously there are several cyclists or insiders who believe that you doped also. Regardless if you did or not.

Greg, you've got to get over your own self centeredness. You can't do that by trying to make Lance a good guy or forcing him to humiliate himself in public. You've got to develop more inner integrity in yourself instead of trying to force others to be honest. This need to "purify" cycling is misguided. You need to focus on purifying yourself.

Wow, this guy just goes further off the cliff with every statement. I really liked him, thought he was a great competitor, but this is just an amazing situation and really, really baffling. He really needs to have someone he trust to tell him to see someone and talk this out before he does something stupid.

This (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond)explains some of the history. Hard to believe it's all motivated by Lemond's love of the sport, yet Lemond seems to have some anecdotal evidence (and maybe more) of Armstrong's guilt, i.e, threats, secrecy. And doing press conferences with, and putting on your payroll, the expert who's going to monitor you? Lemond may look like a wacko here but someone's gotta ask the tough questions.

Thanks for the link. It led to other links; enlightening, indeed. The association with Dr. Ferrari looks bad for LA, but it is not evidence of doping. Quote from link about Ferrari:

"If it doesn't show up in the drug controls, then it's not doping," Ferrari was quoted as having said (a statement he has since characterized as a misquote), reportedly also adding that if he were a rider, he just might take whatever he could get away with. And by the way, he informed the French sports daily L'Equipe and a handful of Italian newspapers, "EPO is not dangerous, it's the abuse that is. It's also dangerous to drink 10 liters of orange juice."

Kaboom. It was as if he'd tried to toss a hand grenade at his critics from a car, but forgot that the windows were rolled up.

He said that in '94, and LA stayed with him until '04, when the Dr. was convicted of doping. Yikes!

But another quote from the LA Wik link:

Throughout his career only one test showed indications of the presence of doping products: in 1999, a urine sample showed traces of corticosteroids, but the amount was not in the positive test range. He later produced a medical certificate showing he used an approved cream for saddle sores which contained the substance.

It is possible LA used the Dr. only for nutrition, altitude training, etc. Perhaps he trained with banned substances and then raced clean (reportedly a common practice in horse racing). Is it against the rules to do this? Reading through many links, I couldn't see any real evidence against him. And he has the tests on his side, unlike Barry Bonds. I am still inclined to believe Armstrong, but there is a shadow of doubt, guilt by association, at least.

You also have to remember that the French accusation came out at a time when Lance was totally dominanting the race for years. That was something that was just not allowed in the minds of many Frenchmen. How dare this roughneck, rowdy American dominate over the long recognized superior Eurocyclist snobs? I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the mission was to try and pin something....ANYthing on Lance. I also wouldn't be shocked if some French lab person may have looked the other way to allow for some sample shenanigans.

As for Greg...he's just reallly sad. You would think the guy would be comfortable with his place in American cycling history. He's still the first cyclist I could have ever remembered by name.

He's just not the best...that would be Lance. Sorry Greg.

greg lemond is a crazy old man.

Greg LeMond was the last clean winner of the Tour de France period. He probably shouldn't have confronted Armstrong at Interbike, but he's angry and Armstrong is a fraud...

Define "Clean." Are you limiting "clean" to not using anything specifically on the banned list or to not using any PEDs? If you are using the limited "Banned List," then you may be correct about Lemond. However, you are using some pretty weak thinking and really splitting hairs. By that definition, Barry Bonds was perfectly okay taking BALCO's "Clear" PED because that particular PED hadn't been specifically banned when he was using it even though his intent (or that of his trainer) was to gain a substantial performance gain by using chemistry. Do you see the problem with splitting hairs that finely?

Defining "clean" and "doping" differently are the major sticking point of any doping debate. Thy hypocracy is overwhelming. For example, in a sport that has some of the top endurance athletes in the world I am supposed to believe that the majority has asthma? Give me a break- their TUE's may allow them leeway on prohibited substances but they are still cheating.

I am not defending Armstrong but merely pointing out how lame your assertion is. This rule hair splitting of rules isn't just a problem for just cycling or even just for sports but for so much more.

Greg LeMond was the last clean winner of the Tour de France period.
How do you know he was clean?

Greg LeMond was the last clean winner of the Tour de France period.

Ah okay .................................................. Greg? :lol:

... Brad

You also have to remember that the French accusation came out at a time when Lance was totally dominanting the race for years. That was something that was just not allowed in the minds of many Frenchmen. How dare this roughneck, rowdy American dominate over the long recognized superior Eurocyclist snobs? I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the mission was to try and pin something....ANYthing on Lance. I also wouldn't be shocked if some French lab person may have looked the other way to allow for some sample shenanigans.

As for Greg...he's just reallly sad. You would think the guy would be comfortable with his place in American cycling history. He's still the first cyclist I could have ever remembered by name.

He's just not the best...that would be Lance. Sorry Greg.
I was in France for a couple of these races and didn't get that kind of input from the French people I met. Most appreciated the attention LA brought to a race they are very proud of. Some racing fans expressed a preference for the riders they supported over LA but that struck me as the same thing as a Yankee fan supporting Jeeter over Beckett. You shouldn't confuse the sentiments of the French public with the sentiments of the French media. Any media will be happy to create or inflate an issue to sell ads.

wow, after reading about Lemond's behavior, i believe *he* should be a doper - and a heavily medicated on at that...

stay on your meds, greg!

no one will ever topple Lance. He bounced back from brain, lung, and ball cancer for craps sake. even if he did dope he did the greatest feat of showing the world that cancer is not a death sentence, and that with determination and some luck but mostly hard work you can do anything.

no one can ***** that armor.

most of you posting here, if you went though 1 round of chemo you'd want to shrink up and die and forget doing anything ever again...it is brutal. like drinking gasoline and injecting bleach but with doctor supervision to bring you to the edge of death and back.

what it did for Lance was strip off a lot of weight and push his pain threshold past everyone elses.

no...Lance is too good. plain and simple.

The time is soon arriving where we will feel sorry for Greg Lemond in his downward spiral.

You also have to remember that the French accusation came out at a time when Lance was totally dominanting the race for years. That was something that was just not allowed in the minds of many Frenchmen. How dare this roughneck, rowdy American dominate over the long recognized superior Eurocyclist snobs? I don't think it's too much of a stretch to say that the mission was to try and pin something....ANYthing on Lance. I also wouldn't be shocked if some French lab person may have looked the other way to allow for some sample shenanigans.
A conspiracy theory involving Eurosnobs? :rolleyes:

You should ask some "Eurosnobs" how do we feel about Armstrong. He's pretty popular and well respected in Europe, regardless of whether he doped or not.

Regardless of your position on Greg or Lance, here (http://www.thefredcast.com/?p=406)is a very interesting interview with Greg Lemond shortly after his "heckling" appearance at Lance's press conference at Interbike. At least you can hear some of his motivation, for what it's worth.

And here (http://www.thefredcast.com/?p=405)is the actual press conference, but the audio isn't good enough to hear Greg's comments - you can however, hear Lance's responses!

I was there at IB but I missed the press conference!

I actually led a bike tour with Greg to the 1999 Tour de France - and I can tell you, this guy enjoyed his champagne! He was a very nice and fun person back then. I haven't seen him since then, so I had to remind him who I was when I spoke to him at Interbike (he was there the whole time at the Lemond booth, not just for the press conference or to discredit Lance). He did recognize me (after being reminded...), and we had a nice 20 minute chat about that Tour. I didn't have the nerve to ask him about why he is so adamant about LA. I am saddened with the position he's taken, and think he's doing cycling a disservice.

Lemond is turning into a stalker. He has spent the last 8 years officially staking his claim that Armstrong was doping. Well....he hasnt proven it and now he is bordering on just being a pathological stalker. Its time Lemond gave proof or shut up and let it go. Is Lemond going to spend his entire life stalking Armstrong with unproven allegations ?
Lemond is a 3 time Tour De France winner but now he has turned into an 8 time stalker loser.
I suggest Lemond show some dignity and walk away from this obsession.


lemond also stalked floyd landis if you recal...tried to get floyd to recant. :eek:.

ed rader

Wow, this guy just goes further off the cliff with every statement. I really liked him, thought he was a great competitor, but this is just an amazing situation and really, really baffling. He really needs to have someone he trust to tell him to see someone and talk this out before he does something stupid.


I agree, Brian. someone should really tell Lance to go and see a shrink. or get a reality check/ego-deflator.

This (http://www.velonews.com/article/83679/) qualifies as exercising incredibly poor judgment, IMO.

Greg seems to have been spiraling down since he retired from racing.

Spiraling down in ever decreasing circles, so maybe he will eventually disappear up his own orifice?

I've always wondered what affect the chemotherapy, etc. had on Lance.

I remember not being able to get angry about anything for years after I finished chemo back in 1980. Since I wasn't athletic at the time I don't know if it affected me in any way related to endurance etc. Of course now, I have to deal with the occasional tumor that developed due to the chemo.

I also think Trek dropping his brand is another reason for this.

i'm not clear as to why it's a bad move on greg lemond's part. perhaps i question his motives. is lemond jealous? could he have won 6 or more tours if he wasn't shot in the chest and didn't give hinault a free win? is he just trying to portray himself as the last clean tdf winner, before epo, hgh, autologous transfusions, etc became mainstream? or perhaps he really wants to do his part to clean up a dirty sport? whatever. we make our own conclusions, and in the end, we probably won't care about the opinions of those who disagree with us. i doubt lemond or armstrong give a crap what any of us think.

if we care about doping in cycling, lemond brings up some good points. doping controls are predictable, and if you know you will beat the controls, it doesn't matter how frequently you are tested. merely passing some tests doesn't prove innocence. lemond's statement calls into question the knowledge and validity of armstrong's pocket doping expert.

if we don't care about doping or believe armstrong is not a doper, then armstrong was the strongest guy on the strongest team for 7 straight years, and why are you reading this? all of armstrong's competition (ullrich, pantani, hamilton, landis, heras, basso, and vinokourov, to name the ones that come to mind)has been sanctioned for doping. if armstrong wasn't clean, was he cheating any more than anyone else? and please don't mention the cancer crap. to suggest that armstrong won 7 straight tours because cancer made him lighter and tougher is idiocy. how many other people has cancer made superhuman? shiit maybe i should start smoking...

here is an interesting development: today the french anti-doping authority offered to retest armstrong's 6 positive samples (epo) from 1999, for which he has never satisfactorily answered. the ball (lance's one superduper post-cancer nut) is in lance's court. i am curious as to how he will respond to this. i think he is a doper and a liar, but also the strongest rider in 7 straight tours de france.

You're behind. Lance already replied.

When I started this thread, it was because I was put off by Greg's means. Regardless of his motives (which only he truly knows), I consider the rude manner in which he chooses to pursue his crusade inexcusable.


i'm not clear as to why it's a bad move on greg lemond's part. perhaps i question his motives. is lemond jealous? could he have won 6 or more tours if he wasn't shot in the chest and didn't give hinault a free win? is he just trying to portray himself as the last clean tdf winner, before epo, hgh, autologous transfusions, etc became mainstream? or perhaps he really wants to do his part to clean up a dirty sport? whatever. we make our own conclusions, and in the end, we probably won't care about the opinions of those who disagree with us. i doubt lemond or armstrong give a crap what any of us think.

if we care about doping in cycling, lemond brings up some good points. doping controls are predictable, and if you know you will beat the controls, it doesn't matter how frequently you are tested. merely passing some tests doesn't prove innocence. lemond's statement calls into question the knowledge and validity of armstrong's pocket doping expert.

if we don't care about doping or believe armstrong is not a doper, then armstrong was the strongest guy on the strongest team for 7 straight years, and why are you reading this? all of armstrong's competition (ullrich, pantani, hamilton, landis, heras, basso, and vinokourov, to name the ones that come to mind)has been sanctioned for doping. if armstrong wasn't clean, was he cheating any more than anyone else? and please don't mention the cancer crap. to suggest that armstrong won 7 straight tours because cancer made him lighter and tougher is idiocy. how many other people has cancer made superhuman? shiit maybe i should start smoking...

here is an interesting development: today the french anti-doping authority offered to retest armstrong's 6 positive samples (epo) from 1999, for which he has never satisfactorily answered. the ball (lance's one superduper post-cancer nut) is in lance's court. i am curious as to how he will respond to this. i think he is a doper and a liar, but also the strongest rider in 7 straight tours de france.

Lemond's motives are simple. make cycling, and by proxy all sports, fair and safe.

he just has a grating approach and gets in the face of people. is it wrong ? one thing for sure
he gets press. any press is good press...he keeps the drug issues on the front page

as long as he doesn't lie...or speculate....

Lemond's motives are simple. make cycling, and by proxy all sports, fair and safe.

he just has a grating approach and gets in the face of people. is it wrong ? one thing for sure
he gets press. any press is good press...he keeps the drug issues on the front page

as long as he doesn't lie...or speculate....

Those are his stated motives. Given his actions though, I have to wonder whether there's more to it than that. If I was so driven to make cycling drug free, I wouldn't be going about it by trying to discredit riders - past or present. That's the job for the labs and the anti-doping agencies. What the heck is there to be gained by slinging unprovable allegations about? You think ASO, UCI and many of the Pro Teams aren't getting the message?

The situation is improving, but I honestly don't see how Greg is advancing things.

lemond's statement calls into question the knowledge and validity of armstrong's pocket doping expert.



I believe Don Catlin is recognized as one of the foremost anti doping experts in the US. As the head UCLA’s WADA Agency accredited laboratory (also widely recognized as one of the best labs in the world) he was the expert brought in by WADA to validate dope test procedures in court. I think he was one of the driving forces behind the development of useable EPO test. I have read articles by him a few years ago trying to develop methods to address testings biggest problem ... that the tests always lag behind the current drug of choice. Things like genetic and athletic performance profiles to identify unreasonable spikes in performance as indicative of doping rather than a positive test for a specific drug.

At least Catlin is doing something proactive to address the issue of doping in sport. So he is being paid to do it by Armstrong ... somebody has to pay for it, it doesn't happen gratis. Team Highroad and CSC, who get good marks for running clean programs, pay for their own testing too ... and to my understanding are not going to the extent that Armstrongs program is planning. LeMond seems to be flailing at the windmills of the past while contributing nothing to proactively deal with the current and future doping problem.

Lemond's motives are simple. make cycling, and by proxy all sports, fair and safe.


He isn't doing anything for that. If that were his motive he wouldn't be following one person around.

Lemond has an attitude and a chip on his shoulder. When he rode & won he was not a hero or a celebrity in the USA other than from a select group of admirers that followed the sport. LA surpassed the accomplishments of GL and is the record holder, with all of the celebrity and fame.
For those that did not read LA's books, he did in fact DOPE during his chemo with EPO when his chances of survival were <10% per the medical wisdom. Maybe he became a mini hulk without all of the green goo.
If you have followed GL rants and his history with his bike brand and the relationship, or lack thereof with Trek and the late Trek president. True to form, he was a radical with them before, during and after their agreement and relationship.

To some Lemond is a madman. An insane stalker who just won't leave Armstrong alone no matter where they may be together.

It's hilarious, entertaining and most importantly ticks off the "Haters" thus creating bad publicity for ol Greg.


If you just see the whole thing for what it is then you too, will find the humor in it. I mean cmon... Lance goes up to give a speech and Greg is right there front row center. HILARIOUS!

... If you just see the whole thing for what it is then you too, will find the humor in it. I mean cmon... Lance goes up to give a speech and Greg is right there front row center. HILARIOUS!

And LA let him ask the first question just to get the little troll out of the way. :lol:

Lemond's motives are simple. make cycling, and by proxy all sports, fair and safe.

Settle it fair and square. Make them ride Western Flyer tricycles.

The problem I have with Lemonds' approach is his total black and white perspective on the matter. His absolute belief in the VOmax and wattage test is such that we might as well just give everyone the test and assign places in the race without racing since no one can ever perform above that which occurs in a "lab tested situation". This implies that the lab test is 100 percent valid in other circumstances and that we know absolutely everything there is to know about how the human body works. If this is true why haven't we cured cancer and other problems.

Unfortunately the "lab test" does not include how things like faith, will, pain endurance and other motivations effect the human body in a real competition. Nor as Lemond describes it allow for anyone to improve thier performance beyond a certain genetic baseline. Lemond believes that Lance could not ride faster than him without drugs because in testing Lemond had one of the highest VOmax ever recorded at 92 or some such high number. Several points higher than Lances Vomax. There is certainly some credibility to this arguement but there are certainly other things going on in the body which may effect oxygen utilization and some of which may not yet be understood.

It is now being learned that the human body is more than only a chemical machine so there is a whole lot more to this picture than just basic chemistry. What I am waiting to see is a rider with Lemonds genetics and Armstrongs discipline, will power and pain endurance. That rider would be superman