View Poll Results: Who was the greatest American cyclist: LeMond or Armstrong?
Greg LeMond
49
27.84%
Lance Armstrong
127
72.16%
Voters: 176. You may not vote on this poll
Revisit the greatest American cyclist debate: LeMond or Armstrong
#76
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Back on topic: LA - 16 years at or near the top of the sport.
1993 UCI World Cycling Champion
Winner of Tour of America
US national Cycling Champion
1994 - Second at Liege-Baston-Liege
1995 - Winner of Tour of America
1996 - Winner of La Fleche Wallone, 2nd Liege-Baston-Liege, 2nd Paris-Niece
1998 - Winner of Tour of Luxembourg, 4th in Vuelta
1999-2005 Tour de France Winner
2009 - 3rd Tour de France
Twice 2nd at Amstel Gold
Can you really say he's obviously second to LeMond?
1993 UCI World Cycling Champion
Winner of Tour of America
US national Cycling Champion
1994 - Second at Liege-Baston-Liege
1995 - Winner of Tour of America
1996 - Winner of La Fleche Wallone, 2nd Liege-Baston-Liege, 2nd Paris-Niece
1998 - Winner of Tour of Luxembourg, 4th in Vuelta
1999-2005 Tour de France Winner
2009 - 3rd Tour de France
Twice 2nd at Amstel Gold
Can you really say he's obviously second to LeMond?
Last edited by Proteos; 08-13-09 at 01:16 PM.
#77
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
From a purely physical respect... I honestly don't think someone like even the great Merckx in his prime would win a Tour de France today, much less five. And if he couldn't, Anquetil (sp?) couldn't, nor could Hinault. Merckx averaged 38 km/h in 71. His other wins were at an average of 34 and 35 km/h. (Yes, hard to compare because of course particulars and weather). Hinault won two years at the same 38 km/h speed. LeMonds were 37 and 38. From 1991 on, the average speed of the winner has gone from peaking at 37 or 38 to being the norm, to being on the slower side. 2007 was the first time since the 1994 it's dipped below 39 km/h. Generally, they're at 40 or 41 km/h now.
Some of this is equipment, perhaps, but increased popularity and improved training methods have created stronger riders. My feeling is that outside of Merckx, Hinault, and LeMond, no other winners would be able to hang very long with todays riders and even they would be suffering, none to finish on the podium.
Some of this is equipment, perhaps, but increased popularity and improved training methods have created stronger riders. My feeling is that outside of Merckx, Hinault, and LeMond, no other winners would be able to hang very long with todays riders and even they would be suffering, none to finish on the podium.
Except for Time trials average speed is pretty meaningless and even there distance, wind and elevation can be an influence. Not to mention what a rider needs for his GC position.
If the riders today are so much better why haven't dozens of them shattered Merckx's hour record?
#79
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Still, as best American (back on topic), is it influential or strongest? Strongeset? I'd say LA. Influential? I think LeMond kickstarted American interest in the Tour in a way that LA has done, but perhaps was more influential because he was the first to win.
Back on Merckx: Even Armstrong refers to him as the greatest of all time... and Merckx did win the Giro 5 times, the Vuelta once, and Tour 5 times. For those idiots that claim (through hearsay, that LA doped), know that Merckx got caught 3 times doping and was kicked out of the Giro one year for it.
Last edited by Proteos; 08-14-09 at 06:03 AM.
#80
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
Merckx doesn't have the one hour record. Boardman on a standard bicycle does. Actually, several people have better times than Merckx, albeit all but Boardman on aero bikes.
Still, as best American (back on topic), is it influential or strongest? Strongeset? I'd say LA. Influential? I think LeMond kickstarted American interest in the Tour in a way that LA has done, but perhaps was more influential because he was the first to win.
Back on Merckx: Even Armstrong refers to him as the greatest of all time... and Merckx did win the Giro 5 times, the Vuelta once, and Tour 5 times. For those idiots that claim (through hearsay, that LA doped), know that Merckx got caught 3 times doping and was kicked out of the Giro one year for it.
Still, as best American (back on topic), is it influential or strongest? Strongeset? I'd say LA. Influential? I think LeMond kickstarted American interest in the Tour in a way that LA has done, but perhaps was more influential because he was the first to win.
Back on Merckx: Even Armstrong refers to him as the greatest of all time... and Merckx did win the Giro 5 times, the Vuelta once, and Tour 5 times. For those idiots that claim (through hearsay, that LA doped), know that Merckx got caught 3 times doping and was kicked out of the Giro one year for it.
For the Giro the test is very dubious. Merckx actually faced the problems Lance worries about. Merckx was admitted to the TDF the same year as the Giro Drug test because of irregulatrities in the testing. (It was also on a stage where Merckx had no reason to dope).
Back to the hour. Boardman beat Merckx by a mere 10 meters. If riders are much better today shouldn't there be dozens part that mark? Heck shouldn't allowed improvements in tires and improved friction reduction account for more than that in an hour? But there is a well known reason why any athlete even close to Merckx should be able to beat his record! Merckx originally intended to break the records for the 5k, 10k 20k and hour all in one ride. He eventually decided to not try for the 5k. But still this is like trying to break a record for the mile while breaking the 1/4 mile and 1/2 mile on the way.
And BTW the current record holder is Ondrej Sosenka. Hardly a new record as his effort was in 2005.
Also most of those who think Armstrong doped know a lot more about cycling than you do and are far from idiots. There are lots of reasons to think he doped. There are even more to think he has a great public relations team.
#81
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Well, Keith, you broke it! You have the news! Gather around L'Equipe! Keith has the proof you've been looking for all these years! He knows more about cycling than all of us. Just ask him. He'll tell you.
#82
Gay Israel
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Midtown Detroit
Posts: 77
Bikes: '83 Bianchi Nuovo Racing, '89 Bianchi Sport SX
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
He may not know more than "everyone" but he certainly has you beat.
#83
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I know the rumors and I know the history, but to suggest he has this publicity department and gets a free pass just because he's Lance is ridiculous. The greatest cyclist of all time didn't get a free pass (well, once at the Giro, perhaps). Landis didn't either (even though my stupid self still thinks it's possible he didn't dope). Is it possible Lance really did, yes. Until I see and A and a B positive (which is why they have two), I'll sit around in my ignorant and stupid way and give him the benefit of the doubt, because I'd rather do that than jump on a bandwagon and be a hater, like so many on this forum.
#85
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 693
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
What you do off the bike is part of your legacy, like it or not. Political context, personal morality, cultural background and religion have all helped shape our memories of past champions. Even the media manipulators of today cannot escape that.
If a rider philanders, loses large parts of his career to health and/or political factors, polarises and fascinates the wider public, historians have a right to record it all.
If a rider philanders, loses large parts of his career to health and/or political factors, polarises and fascinates the wider public, historians have a right to record it all.
#86
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 210
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A few comments from someone who started racing in the mid-80's because of Lemond:
1) Zabriskie holds the ITT speed record now. 54.676kph in 2005.
2) Claiming the '99 retroactive tests are proof of LA testing positive is asinine considering all of the issues, including chain of custody, that even the lab won't refute.
3) I'd put Taylor, Lemond, Armstrong and Phinney in the mix.
1) Zabriskie holds the ITT speed record now. 54.676kph in 2005.
2) Claiming the '99 retroactive tests are proof of LA testing positive is asinine considering all of the issues, including chain of custody, that even the lab won't refute.
3) I'd put Taylor, Lemond, Armstrong and Phinney in the mix.
#87
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Diego
Posts: 418
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
i have to say LA only focused on the TDF because it is the most prestigious grand tour. if he won the Giro 7 times it sure wouldnt have had the impact of winning the Tour de France 7 times. idk if its harder im just saying its more prestigious.
I am voting for LA.
and GL did not introduce the world to aero bars. maybe to professional cycling...idk know if thats true...
I know that Dave Scott tested the first prototype in 87 and they were used that year in kona.
I am voting for LA.
and GL did not introduce the world to aero bars. maybe to professional cycling...idk know if thats true...
I know that Dave Scott tested the first prototype in 87 and they were used that year in kona.
#88
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 103
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
History will probably be the best judge. 20 years from now I suspect Merckx will still be considered the greatest of all time and I think Armstrong will be considered the best American. I think the litmus test for road racers is the Tour de France and the bottom line is everything else aside, Armstrong won 7 in a row and LeMond won 3. In the end, that'll be the bottom line.
#89
Riding behind enemy lines
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Occupied Texas
Posts: 408
Bikes: Orbea, Trek, Cadex, Colnago, Schwinn, Specialized, Poghliaghi, Kellog, KHS, Kellog, Litespeed
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Since Armstrong has used chemical enhancements, I voted Lemond. But I'm not a fan of either.
__________________
------------------------------------
Armstrong never got caught cheating.
That probably makes him as good a cheater as a cyclist.
-- Some guy at the Dallas Crits
------------------------------------
Armstrong never got caught cheating.
That probably makes him as good a cheater as a cyclist.
-- Some guy at the Dallas Crits
#91
Old School Track Guy
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Frisco, Texas
Posts: 198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts