Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 38 Posts

·
Impulse Athletic Coaching
Joined
·
5,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I figure that this was too OT for the lance/ashendon thread, so I thought I would make a new post. I didn't want to detract from the good discussion that was started there...regardless of where it ends up.

Anyways, Greg LeMond says he never doped and he couldn't compete with those who were blood doping in the early 90s. Now, I have two concerns with this statement.

1.) Evidence of EPO use in athletes/cyclists dates back to 1986. Why should we believe that LeMond did not partake with EPO?

2.) There was also no test for blood transfusions until 2000. Also, presumably all samples from the 1980s and early 1990s are no longer existent, making it impossible to back test.

So...why should we believe he didn't do EPO or blood transfusions, since these were very popular in the mid/late 80s (especially in the US)? There was no test for EPO or homologous transfusions until nearly two decades later, and still no proof-positive test for autologous transfusions.

What say ye?

http://books.google.com/books?id=nP...a=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#PPA7,M1

http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/blog/procycling/cycling-doping-scandals/
 

·
Slightly Opinionated
Joined
·
10,231 Posts
Because he's Greg freakin' LeMond. He can do no wrong.










:rolleyes:

He's likely just as dirty as anyone else.
 

·
For president!
Joined
·
7,802 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
I figure that this was too OT for the lance/ashendon thread, so I thought I would make a new post. I didn't want to detract from the good discussion that was started there...regardless of where it ends up.

Anyways, Greg LeMond says he never doped and he couldn't compete with those who were blood doping in the early 90s. Now, I have two concerns with this statement.

1.) Evidence of EPO use in athletes/cyclists dates back to 1986. Why should we believe that LeMond did not partake with EPO?

2.) There was also no test for blood transfusions until 2000. Also, presumably all samples from the 1980s and early 1990s are no longer existent, making it impossible to back test.

So...why should we believe he didn't do EPO or blood transfusions, since these were very popular in the mid/late 80s (especially in the US)? There was no test for EPO or homologous transfusions until nearly two decades later, and still no proof-positive test for autologous transfusions.

What say ye?

http://books.google.com/books?id=nP...a=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#PPA7,M1

http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/blog/procycling/cycling-doping-scandals/
I would need some more evidence to accept point number one.

Autologous blood transfusions are definitely useful in peaking for a big event, like the '84 Olympics or Rominger's hour record. They are less useful over the course of a season, as really poor performances are to be expected after taking out blood. Guys who are doing this now (with a fuentes like program) are using EPO to avoid the really low points and quickly rebuild red blood cell levels.

He certainly could have been doing <del>autologous</del> homologous blood transfusions, although there is no evidence that points to that. Of course it's possible.

As to the general history of doping in the sport contrasted with EPO use in the '90s, there's doping and then there's doping. Using amphetamines isn't any less cheating than using EPO, but the performance gains are so much smaller that riders could still compete and be clean. That just isn't possible with EPO, when riders are boosting their FTP by huge amounts.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
I figure that this was too OT for the lance/ashendon thread, so I thought I would make a new post. I didn't want to detract from the good discussion that was started there...regardless of where it ends up.

Anyways, Greg LeMond says he never doped and he couldn't compete with those who were blood doping in the early 90s. Now, I have two concerns with this statement.

1.) Evidence of EPO use in athletes/cyclists dates back to 1986. Why should we believe that LeMond did not partake with EPO?

2.) There was also no test for blood transfusions until 2000. Also, presumably all samples from the 1980s and early 1990s are no longer existent, making it impossible to back test.

So...why should we believe he didn't do EPO or blood transfusions, since these were very popular in the mid/late 80s (especially in the US)? There was no test for EPO or homologous transfusions until nearly two decades later, and still no proof-positive test for autologous transfusions.

What say ye?

http://books.google.com/books?id=nP...a=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#PPA7,M1

http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/blog/procycling/cycling-doping-scandals/
The links you provide do not support either of your claims. In addition there is no evidence or even rumor of EPO use or transfusions by Tour riders in the 80's, although it is possible it was used in the 89 Tour
 

·
Ron&Fez XM202/Sirius197
Joined
·
483 Posts
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

How dare you slander the lord LeMond:rolleyes:. Expect a serious slamming. Even thinking that he "Could" have doped will get you a serious bashing here.

Greg "says" he never doped, so he must be telling the truth:thumbsup: Remember cyclists never lie.:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
494 Posts
Because Lemond didn't test positive for EPO. Armstrong did; see blood samples for 1999. Lemond didn't use a convicted Dr. sanctioned for providing EPO to athletes. Armstrong did. It's pretty simple really.
 

·
Impulse Athletic Coaching
Joined
·
5,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
SilasCL said:
I would need some more evidence to accept point number one.

Autologous blood transfusions are definitely useful in peaking for a big event, like the '84 Olympics or Rominger's hour record. They are less useful over the course of a season, as really poor performances are to be expected after taking out blood. Guys who are doing this now (with a fuentes like program) are using EPO to avoid the really low points and quickly rebuild red blood cell levels.

He certainly could have been doing <del>autologous</del> homologous blood transfusions, although there is no evidence that points to that. Of course it's possible.

As to the general history of doping in the sport contrasted with EPO use in the '90s, there's doping and then there's doping. Using amphetamines isn't any less cheating than using EPO, but the performance gains are so much smaller that riders could still compete and be clean. That just isn't possible with EPO, when riders are boosting their FTP by huge amounts.
And why not autologous?


circa 1991:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/us/stamina-building-drug-linked-to-athletes-deaths.html
Physicians say they believe athletes began using the drug almost with the beginning of clinical trials in 1986. Then the deaths began. In 1987 five Dutch racers died suddenly. In 1988 a Belgian and two more Dutch riders died. In 1989 five more Dutch riders died, and last year three Belgians and two Dutch riders died. Transfusions of Extra Blood
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,254 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
And why not autologous?


circa 1991:
http://www.nytimes.com/1991/05/19/us/stamina-building-drug-linked-to-athletes-deaths.html
Physicians say they believe athletes began using the drug almost with the beginning of clinical trials in 1986. Then the deaths began. In 1987 five Dutch racers died suddenly. In 1988 a Belgian and two more Dutch riders died. In 1989 five more Dutch riders died, and last year three Belgians and two Dutch riders died. Transfusions of Extra Blood
But LeMond had no jump in his performances at that time.

You're in college now? If that's the case you were just born in the time period LeMond was the best cyclist in the world. He was third in '84 and literally gave the '85 tour to his teammate Hinault. You really need to familiarize yourself with his progression. He was a great rider from the time he got on the bike.

It wasn't like his talent was revealed when he was 27 or 28 years old like some other riders we're talking about.

I'll be nice, but it's really bad that you're impugning LeMond without one single solitary piece of evidence. Not only that, he's been acknowledged by his contemporaries and the general public who meet him to be a very nice guy, going out of his way to talk to people, as opposed to another American who is widely regarded as a jerk. In hindsight, everything he's said about PED's has been correct.

Not one pro cyclist has said one thing about LeMond regarding doping despite LA's threat to get 10 people to say he took EPO.

Not only that, when LeMond was shot, he didn't use EPO at the Cal Davis hospital. He didn't get any transfusions either because they were concerned that the blood bank was contaminated with HIV. His HCT was supposedly in the low 20's and it nearly killed him and it did hurt his recovery tremendously.
 

·
Impulse Athletic Coaching
Joined
·
5,576 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
rook said:
Because Lemond didn't test positive for EPO. Armstrong did; see blood samples for 1999. Lemond didn't use a convicted Dr. sanctioned for providing EPO to athletes. Armstrong did. It's pretty simple really.
How about the hundreds of other athletes who were using it in that era? If blood doping and EPO give such a huge advantage, how could GL win 3 Tours against them when EPO was obviously in use?

This has nothing to do with an Armstrong comparison, please don't bring him into this thread.
 

·
Fly on a windshield
Joined
·
1,272 Posts
rook said:
Because Lemond didn't test positive for EPO. Armstrong did; see blood samples for 1999. Lemond didn't use a convicted Dr. sanctioned for providing EPO to athletes. Armstrong did. It's pretty simple really.
Add to that former teamates and soigneur saying that some shady stuff was going on at US Postal.

So what we're left with is actual public record evidence on one side and Lemond is drunk/grumpy old man character assasination on the other side.

Unless the LA Inc. PR machine can produce some really convincing evidence of
1) French conspiracies
2) Scientific peer reviewed evidence to backup Coyle's studies
3) Former teamates/soigneurs text messaging or phone conversations to support the "They're out ot get me" theory

Many here will remain in the LA is a fraud camp.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
How about the hundreds of other athletes who were using it in that era? If blood doping and EPO give such a huge advantage, how could GL win 3 Tours against them when EPO was obviously in use?

This has nothing to do with an Armstrong comparison, please don't bring him into this thread.
"Hundreds of other athletes" ?? Do you have any evidence of this? Any evidence of even ONE Tour rider using transfusions or EPO in the 80's? There is a huge amount of evidence of use in 91 until today, why are you unable to find anything from just 3 years earlier if "Hundreds" of athletes were using?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
how could GL win 3 Tours against them when EPO was obviously in use?
Obviously in use? EPO was in use in 86? If it was obvious then you should be able to produce some evidence.... so far you have produced nothing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,561 Posts
bigpinkt said:
Obviously in use? EPO was in use in 86? If it was obvious then you should be able to produce some evidence.... so far you have produced nothing.
I can believe there may have been select athletes (e.g. Indurain who was working with one of the Italian dope doctors very early on) using either transfusions and/or EPO prior to it's common use. But most every account the spring of '94 with Ferrari at Gewiss is when the secret was out of bag about EPO, which obviously means it's potent effects weren't well known prior to that. I think either Voet or Virenque have talked about how teams were scrambling to get on it in time for the Tour that year. I also think that's why blood doping wasn't routine before then, basically few had realized the way to real performance gains was by manipulating the blood's oxygen carrying capacity. As long as the dope available was relatively ineffective there wasn't a doping arms race and transfusions probably just seemed like too much of hassle. Once EPO came on the scene and was around for so long, it became undoubtably clear to everyone that that was the way to go, and I imagine blood transfusions became popular once the EPO test came on board.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,254 Posts
Dwayne Barry said:
I can believe there may have been select athletes (e.g. Indurain who was working with one of the Italian dope doctors very early on) using either transfusions and/or EPO prior to it's common use. But most every account the spring of '94 with Ferrari at Gewiss is when the secret was out of bag about EPO, which obviously means it's potent effects weren't well known prior to that. I think either Voet or Virenque have talked about how teams were scrambling to get on it in time for the Tour that year. I also think that's why blood doping wasn't routine before then, basically few had realized the way to real performance gains was by manipulating the blood's oxygen carrying capacity. As long as the dope available was relatively ineffective there wasn't a doping arms race and transfusions probably just seemed like too much of hassle. Once EPO came on the scene and was around for so long, it became undoubtably clear to everyone that that was the way to go, and I imagine blood transfusions became popular once the EPO test came on board.
I remember when the first reports of Dutch riders dying started filtering out and the impressions I had were very similiar to your narrative here. At that time steroids were all the rage, with Ben Johnson's exposure, and this EPO and blood manipulation still seemed very foreign and obscure (In spite of the '84 US Olympic Cycling team). It was also around this time that 5k and 10k track times tumbled dramatically, and many of the African athletes responsible were represented by "agents" like Jos Hermens.

The deaths of the Dutch athletes reminded me of what it was like when AIDS was first detected. I grew up in the NY suburbs and was watching the news in '81 or '82 on some bad local channel like WPIX, and the first victims of some immune disorder had appeared. There were like 5 or 6 gay guys coming down with this heretofore unknown disorder. I couldn't understand what the big deal was, it was only a couple of people and these doctors were sounding an alarm and making a big deal, that some plague was about to begin. It was called GRID at the time, Gay Related Immune Deficiency. Looking back it was all very surreal. I don't think I've ever used that word before and I have quite a bit of experience with drugs and drinking.:eek:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
Dwayne Barry said:
I can believe there may have been select athletes (e.g. Indurain who was working with one of the Italian dope doctors very early on) using either transfusions and/or EPO prior to it's common use. But most every account the spring of '94 with Ferrari at Gewiss is when the secret was out of bag about EPO, which obviously means it's potent effects weren't well known prior to that. I think either Voet or Virenque have talked about how teams were scrambling to get on it in time for the Tour that year. I also think that's why blood doping wasn't routine before then, basically few had realized the way to real performance gains was by manipulating the blood's oxygen carrying capacity. As long as the dope available was relatively ineffective there wasn't a doping arms race and transfusions probably just seemed like too much of hassle. Once EPO came on the scene and was around for so long, it became undoubtably clear to everyone that that was the way to go, and I imagine blood transfusions became popular once the EPO test came on board.
Indurain worked with Conconi for a few months early in his career, but left to use Sabino Padilla (who later was found to be doping his athletes) After Padilla left to work his magic on a football team Indurain went back to Conconi for his last year.

The methods used for blood doping in the 70 and 80's were much more primitive then used today. The key difference was that they did not spin out the blood and transfused only the oxygen carrying cells. They used whole blood which boasted blood pressure. This method was good for riding the hour in a controlled inviroment or a running 10K but climbing for 6 hours, day after day, in the summer in France? Nosebleeds would be the least of your worries.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
543 Posts
Paul Kimmage

I'm currently reading his book 'Rough Ride' and in the chapter on his experience at the '89 Tour, he makes a comment about how he dropped Lemond three weeks ago at the Giro and was surprised that Lemond was performing well and leading the Tour now. But at the same time Kimmage was happy for him and it may have been more of a statement contrasting his own shortcomings as a pro as this was about the time he was deciding to quit pro cycling altogether.
I thought this was interesting because it's the first time I've read anything from another pro cyclist about Lemond on this matter ...besides Armstrong of course.
 

·
Slightly Opinionated
Joined
·
10,231 Posts
rook said:
Because Lemond didn't test positive for EPO. Armstrong did; see blood samples for 1999. Lemond didn't use a convicted Dr. sanctioned for providing EPO to athletes. Armstrong did. It's pretty simple really.
So what? How does it change the world?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
2,231 Posts
iliveonnitro said:
I don't have time to respond to the other posts here. I can do that this weekend (maybe tomorrow). The discussion thus far has been, for the most part, great.

I have not, however, done anything unethical or "intellectually dishonest" in academic (or otherwise) definitions. This is your opinion and not true. I never flat out accused GL of doping, but rather questioned why we should believe his story over anyone else. His "era" was from the mid-1980s to the early 1990s, when blood transfusions were certainly around and EPO was still young. There are accounts of early EPO use, as well as blood doping in sport.

FWIW, I do not think GL blood doped during his time. I do, however, like to play devils advocate and question why things must be a certain way. After all, public whims of emotion can be over-carried in one direction or another.
Once again, please share with us the evidence of Tour riders using Transfusions in the 80's. So far you have presented nothing

The question of why Lemond should be believed is because unlike other riders there is zero evidence that he doped. No doping doctors, support staff, teammates, failed testes, dumped bags of cows blood. Nothing. In fact the opposite is true. Lemodns former teammates and DS's all say he was clean.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
13,006 Posts
Moderators Note

please dial back the personal attacks, if you post is missing- I suggest taking that as a warning to stick to the topic as much as possible.

/ back to the argument
// of course he was dirty
/// there was doping before EPO, ask Tom Simpson
//// slashies are fun
 
1 - 20 of 38 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top