Bye-bye, LeMond

[andyh]

He is jus a bit emotinal. But we still should respect him as he was a good racer that won TdF three times ... and he was clean!

Maybe he was... maybe he wasn't... but one thing is for sure... he needs medication now...

prove it....seriously!!!!!!!!

[tymon_tm]

yeah just another "i like him/i like him not" endless discussion..

when business comes to an end (whatever the reason) one party always gets too emotional over the other..

Greg is sorta controversial and emotional person, no one can doubt, which (most often) isn't good for businness - especially when emotions fly around one of company's pillars (LA) - so it's rather his fault that he:

a) either has choosen to coooperate with TREK
b) or was unable to adjust to the corpo profile..

besides that, how can you question what's behind this issue from a plain businness perspective if you don't know what the (written) deal between the two really is.. every obligation is conditioned in different ways..

[Straff]

I agree, he seems to be losing his marbles. <snip> Now it appears he has bitten the hand that fed him for the last few years.

A fool and his money.....

... ahem

[G man]

Whether Lemond was clean or not is just opinion, as no one can "prove" they are clean. His actions over the years don't seem to be those of a doper. I doubt Lemond racing cycles would sponsor stolen underground racing if he had doped in the past. The stolen underground website design isn't to my taste, but gets it's anti doping message across (quite subtly!)


http://su13.us/___su13_us___

G man

[TheBugMan]

Greg is a great cyclist who brought a lot to the sport... Money, equipment, training, excitement and probably drugs.

I still love him for all his pioneering. Will you marry me Greg?

[Amadeus]

Bug man ....

If you would know him you wouldn't have made that remark

It is not only about proof. It is easy to score when shouting out loud Prove it! But as everybody knows nobody can prove it. Anyway it's almost 20 years ago.

But I am sure that anybody that is or was close to Greg knows that he wasn't a doped rider.

[Rodrego Hernandez]

Perhaps Greg will get into contact with a more specialised bike company?

[BenCousins]

his statements to the press on Armstrong founded on hearsay seem a little rash to say the least.

His statements to the press on Armstrong are founded on telephone conversations he had with Armstrong, which were witnessed by his wife.

Lemond was certainly not clean, but he wasn't part of the EPO generation, like other highly regarded US pros.

This court case really hammers home the fact that he whole cycling industry is complicit in the doping. Mmmmmm Trek!

[goldeneye]

Man you guys,

Lemond was certainly, lemond was probably....

How do you say this crap without any sort of documentation, or evidence.

All I see is someone outspoken about illegal practices in cycling.

You certainly don't have to agree with him, but stop it with all the uninformed B.S.

Goldeneye

[TheBugMan]

I'm not saying he was a drug user. He is one (indirect) of the reasons there are drugs though and possibly a direct reason. Just like Sean K. and Francesco M. (my heros) could have been, just like I could have been. There are many things my parents don't even know about me, so don't give me that "if you only knew him in person" crap.

Like I said, I love the guy and still want to marry him. for his bikes

PS: it was a long time ago and I only have fond memories of being a kid with dreams of racing the tour. I am saddened about the state of cycling now, but still have a positive outlook. One day cycling will come back strong and popular and Greg can sell bikes.

[DC41]

The only thing you can say authoritatively was that LeMond (or anyone else from that period) couldn't have been an EPO user for all but perhaps the last two years of his career... it just wasn't available.

I admire the guy. I remember calling the 1-900 number to listen to same-day updates during the 90 tour. In a lot of ways I really miss those days.

[BenCousins]

How do you say this crap without any sort of documentation, or evidence.

Because documentation and evidence are only required by law. Every day we do things based on assumptions of certainty with no evidence. Only a total and utter idiot would demand documentation and evidence for every opinion he has on every subject.

[RTW]

This court case really hammers home the fact that he whole cycling industry is complicit in the doping. Mmmmmm Trek!

Objection.

Please explain how the 'whole' cycling industry is complicit. As someone working for a mountain bike accessory company I take exception to this. What part am I playing in doping?

[Amadeus]

@Euro,

In the mean time most of us are used to the B-S you are often spitting out on this board.

But in this case you simply don’t know what you are talking about (and that certainly is not for the first time). I don’t mind at all, as long as it does not effect other people, you may and can say whatever you whish.

But don't make statements in which you say somebody was certainly not clean please.

What you say about Greg IMHO must be regarded as the opinion of an absolute “nitwit” or a statement form somebody not hindered by any knowledge of the subject. It certainly is annoying when people like you (that just don’t know anything about Greg and his thoughts about doping) are making this kind of wild accusations. And unfounded statements.

[goldeneye]

[quote][/quote]Euro
Every day we do things based on assumptions of certainty with no evidence. Only a total and utter idiot would demand documentation and evidence for every opinion he has on every subject.


Maybe you operate like this----

I dont.

While I don't require documentation/ evidence for every opinion, we are talking about a very specific issue here. So please, no further rationalization for having diarrhea of the mouth.