10/25/13 6:03 AM

The difference is that it appears that riders could achieve something without doping prior to around '93-'94, after that, not so much.

IOW, it's at least possible Lemond was clean, it was never possible that Armstrong or other prominent riders from that generation were clean.

EPO and blood doping are simply too potent to overcome given the variation in natural talent, whereas drugs like anabolic & cortico-steroids and amphetamines don't give the same kind of performance benefit for endurance sport.

10/26/13 10:28 AM

"IOW, it's at least possible Lemond was clean, it was never possible that Armstrong or other prominent riders from that generation were clean. "

IMO, it is likely Lemond is just like the rest. In that i mean by saying and wording he did not dope on the subject of EPO it is likely a prevarication. He doped on the dope dejour [which was not as good I agree] and no one could convince me otherwise. He probably wishes he had access to EPO after the accident, he might have been a 6.99 time winner too, ;)

They all cheat, except now we all know Fellini, err Jake...

10/27/13 5:23 AM

Yeah maybe Lemond is a huge hypocrite but that takes some stones to be so outspoken if so. As far as I'm aware no one has outed Lemond.

10/27/13 5:57 AM

...but he's pushing his luck. If he keeps bragging the way he is now, it's likely that someone will get pissed enough to spill the beans.

10/27/13 10:42 AM

If we wait around for someone who gets pissed off, shouldn't we expect an unreliable story?
Now if there are to be multiple corroborating sources that come along with credible accounts, that would be another story entirely.

One more thing is that GL would likely have maintained informative contacts from Europe who were a lot better informed about the LA saga a lot earlier on, so while we here in the US were complaining about all the "sour grapes" of the Euro's and the Euro press, GL was likely fully aware of how brainwashed the US cycling population was becoming during LA's reign. Try to understand where GL was/is coming from from that vantage, and it might help to better understand Greg's mission if you will.

10/28/13 4:59 AM

You're giving him way too much credit. His "mission" was driven by jealousy and a need to discredit the person who completely eclipsed his accomplishments as an American TDF winner. He will never get over the fact that Lance was a better rider than he ever was.

10/28/13 7:24 AM

There's a relatively well founded phenomenon in the doping world known as "super responder"...just as some athletes respond far better than others to certain types of training, so too do some respond better to certain types of drugs. From everything I've read I believe Lance was most definitely one of those "super responders" cycling's version of a Marion Jones.

This is why I hate the "level playing field" statement, and have you noticed that Lance is now using it, which of course is the ultimate proof that it can't be true :-0

All doping does is introduce another variable which may or may not help one athlete as much as the other...no different than specialized training, just not quite as 'natural'.

10/28/13 8:33 AM

I've seen the argument made that oxygen-doping basically helps relatively big time-trialers, like Indurain or Armstrong, more so than small climbers. Maybe simply because there are far more opportunities to lose time in the mountains than in time trials.

I suspect that Armstrong was better than Lemond is giving him credit for being. After all, he looked a lot more pedestrian as a GT contender before he had cancer because his racing weight appears to have been a good bit higher. Certainly competing at a lower weight made him more competitive in GTs with or without the doping.

10/28/13 9:51 AM

Well, it seems to me both LA & GL had a life changing [near loosing] experience prior to ultimate success.

Both weighed a lot less after said experiences.

From personal experience, 10% make me a lot faster.

10/28/13 4:37 PM

Weight loss can have a disproportionate effect, since it affects multiple variables such as heat-shedding ability, climbing mass and also comfort on the bike relative to being aero. Any fat buildup on the core side of the ab muscles is really troublesome as it leaves less room for circulatory, digestive and breathing organs to perform smoothly and efficiently.
At some point intra-abdominal fat will affect posture (on and off the bike) as the use of the ab muscles may then bring on discomfort due to the ab muscles no longer pulling in a straight line but rather pulling an arc against the entire contents of the abdominal cavity.

I only fluctuate 5-10 pounds and it seems like night and day between 150 and 158, disregarding changes in muscle mass. That's just 5-6%.
At the pro level, the difference would seem to be even more critical, among riders who all maintain top fitness.

10/28/13 5:37 PM

LeMond won the TDF in '86 before he was shot in '87, so some pre-history. Considering he missed two years between wins #1 and #2, to project five TDF is not unreasonable. But still: 3 TDF

One the bitterness camp didn't mention:
GL's 1985 TDF second place to Hinault. I've seen pictures of BH's head streaming blood while he is in full comback mode after a fall - to me BH deserves that win even if GL was stronger. But LeMond has a legitimate argument saying that he was tricked by his team management on the road though. Not 6 TDF, 3.

Armstrong TDF: ??????? (that's seven question marks) Could he have won one? After cancer he was not the mercurical rider he was before, more consistent and determined. I guess that's sort of what this thread is about now.

They were both young world champions, 22 and 21yrs and LA was just 2 or 3 months younger iirc.

LeMond 2 rainbow, 2 silver, and a junior rainbow too, Armstrong had a better classics record.

Armstrong had a better TDF tune-up record (Switzerland, Dauphine, etc erased) but LeMond won a Dauphine and did well in the Giro.

The Armstrong comeback was amazing and inspiring, even if doped. (okay, doped doesn't inspire) LeMond's was pretty awesome. But inspiring a network of gunshot victims around the world, what can you say?

10/28/13 5:49 PM

Does anybody know where to find race results of the day, before the asterisks and purges? It's hard to defend the popular conception of LA's record with a bunch of iirc.

10/29/13 5:26 AM

When everyone in the peloton is limited to the same 50% hematocrit level, it seems that the only way someone would gain any real advantage over their rivals would be if they had a naturally low level to begin with (and thus more to gain), assuming that they were competitive with other un-doped riders at the lower level. Compared to other drugs, EPO was probably more of an equalizer, since there's a defined ceiling that riders couldn't exceed. It's the metabolic equivalent of restrictor-plate racing in NASCAR.

10/29/13 6:23 AM

Lance's record is widely available - check wiki for one- he was a star in the tri world as young as 16...but who knows?

He certainly was not a super domestique as LeMond has stated, regardless.

10/29/13 7:55 AM

I checked wikipedia, it had strikethrough numbers for the GTs but results for TDS, Dauphine, etc were wiped out. The diminishing return slope for time invested on this is pretty steep.

Has anyone considered whether the greatest illicit doping campaign in the history of sport included more than EPO? The restrictor plate argument implicitly indicates the need for a comprehensive program. Maybe with Johan B's testimony we will find out.

Man it stinks to write that last paragraph about my favorite sport. To paraphrase Reagan, we need to cross our fingers but verify.

10/29/13 10:21 AM

quote:

---

Has anyone considered whether the greatest publicized illicit doping campaign in the history of sport included more than EPO?

---

10/29/13 11:27 AM

Exposed is more like it. The problem with a statement like that is lack of proof, as much as I want to agree.

I used to make that argument but the evidence is against it. The team sport examples are individual, maybe ignored or condoned by management but not coordinated by management. It appears that what happened on Postal was a program developed and monitored by management, a conspiracy, and it's still unfolding. I can't see how it could be much more a part of a team's fabric than it was at postal.

But for a real coverup watch the NFL concussion controversy. Even after the union settlement they deny a link between play and brain damage.

10/29/13 8:24 PM

daddy-o wrote "Armstrong had a better classics record. "

I would disagree. Lemond finished 2nd at Milan-San Remo, 3rd at Liege, 4th at Paris-Roubaix, 2nd at the Giro di Lombardia. He also had a 2nd, 1st, 2nd and 1st at the World Championships.

Armstrong won Fleche and San Sebastien and finished 2nd at Liege.

11/3/13 9:40 AM

"Has anyone considered whether the greatest illicit doping campaign in the history of sport included more than EPO?"

YEP, for sure...there's a reason they called it "being on the program". There was WAY more than just EPO and blood transfusions going on, this is where the premise of "super responder" comes into play. In Hamilton's book he even mentions that Lance seemed to have something extra kick in during the last month before the TdF, so much so he wondered if Lance was doing something secret that he didn't share with anyone else at all. My opinion is that Lance really didn't keep secrets from his inner circle very well, he had a reputation for being extraordinarily open about what he was doing, so my guess is he 'responded' better than Tyler in the closing weeks before the Tour.

As far as the "program" is concerned, I got relatively first hand knowledge about what all was involved in it during the winter of '06-'07 when a former pro DS was trying to make a career in the 'real world' and thus I had many a coffee break with him. He had direct connections to Floyd and it was during discussions about Floyd's defending himself that I became aware of just how much was involved in a "program".

Interestingly the attempt at the 'real world' did not succeed and my source returned to the world of pro-cycling in the spring of '07 where he still remains.

11/3/13 9:49 AM

DS = Discovery ??

11/3/13 11:20 AM

I think Paul means Directeur Sportif, but he would have to say for sure.

11/4/13 5:47 AM

Lance was always meticulous and scientific about his training and getting the most from his body. He was also focused entirely on the Tour, with his entire year centered around it. Responding to training is not the same as "super responding" to drugs. Despite Lemond's narcissistic rants, it's quite obvious that Armstrong was/is a gifted, elite athlete and likely the best of his generation.

It's unfortunate that we'll never know what the would have happened if the peloton had been clean during the Armstrong era, but frankly, I doubt it would have been much different other than there being somewhat less difference between the "elites" and the "also rans" who didn't have sophisticated doping programs.

11/7/13 7:07 AM

nevermind

11/14/13 5:01 AM

Cyclingnews.com:

Andy Schleck: I still dream of winning the Tour de France
"Leader of new Trek team says his only goal is to enjoy his cycling"

versus the Armstrong "every minute focused on July" approach

The little I know about sports psychology leads me to conclude Andy's TDF is already over. But it's nice to know millions of us have at least two things in common with him, our dream and our goal.