Originally Posted by
Keith99
It makes sense if plausible deniability was important to Hinault. Those wanting to paint him as a pure villain can't seem to accept that he had some good points.
One of those good pints is unlike many Hinault was willing to actually ride in support of other riders on his team, but only for races Hinault did not particularly care about (and perhaps stage races where a bad day had removed his chances, but I'd bet he would be slow to concede he was out of the running). That good point may have misled Lemond into thinking it would happen in the TDF.
Certainly Hinault was playing the psychological game at a much higher level than Lemond. Lemond probably should have raced for himself since he was supposedly the team leader and not worried about Hinault. It's probably hard when you are riding with a guy who is not only your hero and likely one of the two best riders ever but is also very charismatic.
I was and continue to be a big fan of Hinault. He won everything of note(except Flanders and San Remo) including Paris-Roubaix which he didn't mind saying was a lottery, no a bike race. I don't think he was a villain but I do think he was riding for himself at the Tour that year.