Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
700 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
from Velonews:
LeMond remembered “one of the greater champions, who was recognized more for his loss in the (1989) Tour de France than his first two victories”.

“It’s a really sad day. I see him as one of the great riders who was hampered by injuries. He had a very, very big talent — much more than anyone recognized,” LeMond told France 24 television.

“We were also teammates, competitors, but also friends,” said the three-time Tour de France champion.

“The saddest thing for me is that for the rest of his career he said he won two Tours de France, when in reality we both could have won that race.”



Odd that Lemond could expouse so much admiration for Fignon (a proven cheater), yet spew so much vitriol for Armstrong (based on his own gut feelings and hearsay).

To me this only points towards his jealously of Armstrong as the reason for his attacks. Afterall, he did write history against Fignon, making it much easier. I know you're not supposed to speak bad of the dead, but given his stern stance on the use of PEDs, his response could've been more neutral, rather tha using the terms 'greater champions'. Hypocracy at its near finest.

Well Laurent,RIP.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
DMFT said:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/laurent-fignon-passes-away

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lemond-remembers-fignon

- First off - R.I.P. Mr. Fignon....

- Secondarily, does G.L. sound like a hipocrite in his article to anyone besides me? :confused:

Discuss.........
The guy's not yet cold and you expect Lemond to condemn him for his positive in Eindhoven 21 years ago?

It's called respecting his dignity. Lemond was not only his rival, but an ex-team mate. Lemond talks about a relationship that extended after their retirement. How's the funeral likely to be if he sticks the boot in on various websites worldwide?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
post moved from Pro Cycling
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,954 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,061 Posts
The Weasel said:
from Velonews:
LeMond remembered “one of the greater champions, who was recognized more for his loss in the (1989) Tour de France than his first two victories”.

“It’s a really sad day. I see him as one of the great riders who was hampered by injuries. He had a very, very big talent — much more than anyone recognized,” LeMond told France 24 television.

“We were also teammates, competitors, but also friends,” said the three-time Tour de France champion.

“The saddest thing for me is that for the rest of his career he said he won two Tours de France, when in reality we both could have won that race.”



Odd that Lemond could expouse so much admiration for Fignon (a proven cheater), yet spew so much vitriol for Armstrong (based on his own gut feelings and hearsay).

To me this only points towards his jealously of Armstrong as the reason for his attacks. Afterall, he did write history against Fignon, making it much easier. I know you're not supposed to speak bad of the dead, but given his stern stance on the use of PEDs, his response could've been more neutral, rather tha using the terms 'greater champions'. Hypocracy at its near finest.

Well Laurent,RIP.
Nice choice of nick :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,501 Posts
Given the drugs available before the early 90's were no more effective than placebos in enhancing performance why should he care that Fignon, or anyone else, used them?
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
12,954 Posts
terzo rene said:
Given the drugs available before the early 90's were no more effective than placebos in enhancing performance why should he care that Fignon, or anyone else, used them?
This is absurd. There were plenty of effective doping methods back to the 80's, nevermind the crazy crap the teams were doing pre-Festina.

Yes the racers for the 80's and 90's were doped to the gills, the testing was a joke, the penalties minor, and the rewards great. Pre-Festina the french teams were doping all their GC riders under the gise of "preparation". The strong Omerta and fear of litigation are protecting the few remaining non-outed dopers of that era, but you would have to be delusional to think that any GT winner from the 80's or 90's was remotely clean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
Coolhand said:
This is absurd. There were plenty of effective doping methods back to the 80's, nevermind the crazy crap the teams were doing pre-Festina.

Yes the racers for the 80's and 90's were doped to the gills, the testing was a joke, the penalties minor, and the rewards great. Pre-Festina the french teams were doping all their GC riders under the gise of "preparation". The strong Omerta and fear of litigation are protecting the few remaining non-outed dopers of that era, but you would have to be delusional to think that any GT winner from the 80's or 90's was remotely clean.
That doping of any sort is immoral is not in dispute, however there was a distinct difference in efficacy before EPO and other blood manipulation techniques arrived on the scene.

Pre EPO methods did not skew the results any where near as grotesquely as EPO, HGH & the like did. Riders like Mottet, Delion, Bauer & Lemond could and did compete with riders using cortisone, testosterone & amphetamine because the effects were not anything like as radical.

A rider in the 80's was able to take the position of riding clean without consigning their career to the dustbin. Come 92/93 and on that was a distant memory. Hence Delion's retirement in 92 at 28, and Lemond's & Fignon's accelerated demises, IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,997 Posts
ultimobici said:
Pre EPO methods did not skew the results any where near as grotesquely as EPO, HGH & the like did. Riders like Mottet, Delion, Bauer & Lemond could and did compete with riders using cortisone, testosterone & amphetamine because the effects were not anything like as radical.

A rider in the 80's was able to take the position of riding clean without consigning their career to the dustbin. Come 92/93 and on that was a distant memory. Hence Delion's retirement in 92 at 28, and Lemond's & Fignon's accelerated demises, IMO.
I'd disagree with this.

"Blood Packing" has been around since the 60's (maybe before) and has been proven to be quite effective with enhancing performance, especially over the duration of a 3 week race.

Add in designer steroids that could easily enhance recovery as well as strength and they had plenty of PED's that greatly manipulated results in races....dating back to the 60's.

Then figure some amphetamines to help boost performance, some good pain medication to hold off fatigue longer and you have other methods to increase performance while on the bike...especially during 3 week races.

EPO and HGH may be more efficient and to an extent more effective...but there are plenty of other methods that were very effective dating well before the EPO/HGH era.

To beat those guys as a "clean" rider would be similar to saying a clean rider could beat those in the EPO/HGH era.
 

·
weird huh?
Joined
·
304 Posts
I'd strongly agree with him. (Wookiebiker) Mid 80's we had copious amounts of inosine and gamma-Hydroxybutyric acid, yeah, that stuff.

As well, cocaine and other assorted amphetimines were somewhat widely used from the pros on down. Caffeine suppositories and 'B' vitamins were absolutely commonplace. Alupent (Metaproterenol), for those that had a waiver and perscription were often freely passed around prior to team events.

Of course, we used to carry unwrapped PowerBars literally wrapped around the handlebars near the stem. (Early 80's PowerBars were all but impossible to unwrap after having been in a jersey pocket, the later Mylar packaging made a huge difference.)

Cheers!
To beat those guys as a "clean" rider would be similar to saying a clean rider could beat those in the EPO/HGH era.[/QUOTE]
 

·
Masters Neophyte
Joined
·
2,209 Posts
Coolhand said:
post moved from Pro Cycling
But why, Coolhand? :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
Coolhand said:
This is absurd. There were plenty of effective doping methods back to the 80's, nevermind the crazy crap the teams were doing pre-Festina.

Yes the racers for the 80's and 90's were doped to the gills, the testing was a joke, the penalties minor, and the rewards great. Pre-Festina the french teams were doping all their GC riders under the gise of "preparation". The strong Omerta and fear of litigation are protecting the few remaining non-outed dopers of that era, but you would have to be delusional to think that any GT winner from the 80's or 90's was remotely clean.

+ 1,000,000%
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
544 Posts
[


Odd that Lemond could expouse so much admiration for Fignon (a proven cheater), yet spew so much vitriol for Armstrong (based on his own gut feelings and hearsay).

Two reasons.... 1. Fignon DIED. 2. Fignon never verbally attacked or tried to smear Lemond like Armstrong did
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
404 Posts
Two reasons.... 1. Fignon DIED. 2. Fignon never verbally attacked or tried to smear Lemond like Armstrong did

I think that's about right. Also, Lemond and Fignon raced against each other, and there does develop a grudging respect when you compete that hard against the same individual. It may be fair to say that the only person who really understood Fignon was, in a way, Lemond, and vice versa.

Pre EPO methods did not skew the results any where near as grotesquely as EPO, HGH & the like did. Riders like Mottet, Delion, Bauer & Lemond could and did compete with riders using cortisone, testosterone & amphetamine because the effects were not anything like as radical.

A rider in the 80's was able to take the position of riding clean without consigning their career to the dustbin. Come 92/93 and on that was a distant memory. Hence Delion's retirement in 92 at 28, and Lemond's & Fignon's accelerated demises, IMO.

I totally agree with this, too. Riders could choose to not dope back then, or if they did to dope in a very minor way (that's not defending it, just stating that there were varying levels of doping). Nowadays, the designer drugs, HGH, and especially EPO make riding clean or close to it an impossibility. Yes, Fignon did dope, but compared to the guys doping today he was a saint, relatively. The drugs they took back then don't appear to have made anyone an instant superman. The playing field remained more or less level. EPO changed everything.
 

·
always right sometimes
Joined
·
1,832 Posts
cyclesport45 said:
[


Odd that Lemond could expouse so much admiration for Fignon (a proven cheater), yet spew so much vitriol for Armstrong (based on his own gut feelings and hearsay).

Two reasons.... 1. Fignon DIED. 2. Fignon never verbally attacked or tried to smear Lemond like Armstrong did

Correct, but LeMond went a little overboard with admiration considering his stance on PEDs. This is why we feel that his comments are a bit hypocritical. Based on his comments about a known PEDer, Lance too should be labled a great champion by LeMond..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,501 Posts
Not that I'm a fan of arguments from authority but Peter Winnen and others who rode in both the pre and post EPO era have also said it was possible to win clean before EPO.

More convincing to me is that the drugs available before EPO consistently fail to show statistically significant benefits in endurance sports in double blind controlled studies.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
644 Posts
ultimobici said:
The guy's not yet cold and you expect Lemond to condemn him for his positive in Eindhoven 21 years ago?

It's called respecting his dignity. Lemond was not only his rival, but an ex-team mate. Lemond talks about a relationship that extended after their retirement. How's the funeral likely to be if he sticks the boot in on various websites worldwide?

No. I expect LeMond to not contradict everything he "stands for"....
He is making himself a hipocrite.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top