What foundation was that? Not being flippant. I now of his past association to the livestrong foundation. Is there another?
Thatâs where we part ways.
3 Likes
Hero and only really behind Cav as the greatest TDF legend.
Your talking about Lemond right?
Lewho?!
1 Like
You know. The only American to actually win the tour! Three times actually. Clean. Didnât commit fraud. Perjure himself or you know act like a scumbag.
| 1986 | United States | Greg LeMond | La Vie Claire | 4,094 km (2,544 mi) | 110h 35â 19 | + 3â 10 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1987 | Ireland | Stephen Roche | Carrera JeansâVagabond | 4,231 km (2,629 mi) | 115h 27â 42 | + 40 | 1 |
| 1988 | Spain | Pedro Delgado | Reynolds | 3,286 km (2,042 mi) | 84h 27â 53 | + 7â 13 | 1 |
| 1989 | United States | Greg LeMond | AD RentingâW-CupâBottecchia | 3,285 km (2,041 mi) | 87h 38â 35 | + 8 | 3 |
| 1990 | United States | Greg LeMond | ZâTomasso | 3,504 km (2,177 mi) | 90h 43â 20 | + 2â 16 | 0 |
| 1991 | Spain | Miguel Indurain | Banesto | 3,914 km (2,432 mi) | 101h 01â 20 | + 3â 36 | 2 |
| 1992 | Spain | Miguel Indurain | Banesto | 3,983 km (2,475 mi) | 100h 49â 30 | + 4â 35 | 3 |
| 1993 | Spain | Miguel Indurain | Banesto | 3,714 km (2,308 mi) | 95h 57â 09 | + 4â 59 | 2 |
| 1994 | Spain | Miguel Indurain | Banesto | 3,978 km (2,472 mi) | 103h 38â 38 | + 5â 39 | 1 |
| 1995 | Spain | Miguel Indurain | Banesto | 3,635 km (2,259 mi) | 92h 44â 59 | + 4â 35 | 2 |
| 1996 | Denmark | Bjarne Riis[b] | Team Telekom | 3,765 km (2,339 mi) | 95h 57â 16 | + 1â 41 | 2 |
| 1997 | Germany | Jan Ullrich# | Team Telekom | 3,950 km (2,450 mi) | 100h 30â 35 | + 9â 09 | 2 |
| 1998 | Italy | Marco Pantani | Mercatone UnoâBianchi | 3,875 km (2,408 mi) | 92h 49â 46 | + 3â 21 | 2 |
| 1999 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,687 km (2,291 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2000 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,662 km (2,275 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2001 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,458 km (2,149 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2002 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,278 km (2,037 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2003 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,427 km (2,129 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2004 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,391 km (2,107 mi) | â | â | â |
| 2005 | â | No winner[c] | â | 3,359 km (2,087 mi) | â | â | â |
2 Likes
Lemond was clean? Youâre having a laugh.
5 Likes
Thereâs no one one that list I would say with over 50% certainty were clean.
4 Likes
Iâm not a huge Lemond fan, but I do believe he was 100% clean throughout his career.
He won the genetic lottery with his ridiculously high VO2max. Itâs hard to say if EPO or any other sort of blood doping would have even benefitted him much.
Regardless, itâs his vocalness about clean sport that separates him from the dopers. There have been plenty of doped athletes who advocated clean sport, but you could tell their answers were noncommittal and that they didnât really believe what they were saying, especially when they refused to throw fellow dopers under the bus. Lying combined with hypocrisy is hard, even for Lance.
3 Likes
I donât know that I disagree with much of this. That said, Iâm coming to the understanding that even in the big EPO/blood doping free for all era of Indurain through 06/07, several (most?) riders were of the impression that as long as you were under 50 then you werenât doping. When clearly to the rest of us - doping up to 49.9 is still doping.
Given that understanding, itâs not hard (for me at least) to see that folks pre EPO donât think they were doping, when in fact they MAY HAVE BEEN utilizing injections, creams, etc that are now banned.
I donât know what LeMond did or didnât do, but to rely on hindsight statements from cyclists of a time when drug testing was not done in any regular manner whatsoever is somewhat flawed.
So many people have been vocal until theyâve been found out.
4 Likes
As an external observer (and not even a particularly attentive one back then) I was aware that EPO was banned but they didnât have a direct test for it at the time so could only test haematocrit levels as a proxy. From memory having levels above 50 didnât even get you banned (as they couldnât proved youâd doped), you just werenât allowed to race. If I knew all that there is no way the guys who were actually taking EPO werenât fully aware that it was banned and they were cheating.
If they were using things that werenât banned at the time, then thatâs not doping.
The only reason for that impression was that there was no test for EPO or blood doping and they set the 50 threshold as a safety measure. Riders over 50 werenât sanctioned, just not allowed to race.
The biggest difference was that none of the crap that came before could make a donkey into a race horse. EPO definitely could make a lower VO2max rider (Armstrong) into a higher VO2max rider (Lemond).
1 Like
Thatâs no different than staying below 50 not being doping. 50 was the rule
In the gray area of natural vs unnatural maybe. But purely on the side of legal compared to EPO which is 100% illegal.
You canât say âleaving aside diseasesâ and then use asthma as an example. There are TUEs for many banned substances for cases of disease or injury. Some substances you just canât get one for because we have decided that they are too ripe for abuse.
The problem with your arguments is that the point of sport is not to make it so that every single person competing is equal but that the âfield of playâ is equal. Also to make sure that competition is safe. If EPO was legal in cycling we would have tons of people die because they tried to push the limits and went too far.
Yes, people with asthma can use an inhaler. But they have to submit paperwork for approval, get doctors notes, and many of these excepted medications still have limits that can pop you on a drug test. These are the rules we have created to balance fair sport with also allowing people with conditions to properly treat them and still compete. They probably canât get access to really powerful bronchodilators that would give unfair advantages but we allow them to use ânormalâ inhalers to treat their condition.
2 Likes
That was exactly what I was referring toâŚ.nothing to do with âlegalityâ.
Not anymore.
1 Like
Wow. Because LA was a doper. Lied about being a doper. Admitted he was a doper. Was banned and stripped as a doper⌠NOW Lemond is a doper? You can back that up right?
1 Like
Because asthma medication is a nothing burger while EPO gives one a 10-20% boost in performance.
Trying to conflate the two is trying to justify those that took EPO to win races. Iâve yet to see someone win a major race on an inhaler.
Ya. I understand. But there has never been a big uproar. Never been any evidence. Never really been anything. It has been stated many times that Lemond retired as something had definitely changed in the peleton. The next year he could no longer keep up with people he had been trouncing before. He new it was time to leave.
Amazing how people defend an admitted a lier, fraud and all around ahole as he did his âTIMEâ. Yet attack someone that has no evidence against him.
We have had 40 years for someone to come forward on Lemond. I think it would have happened by now.
1 Like