OLN Coverage: G. LeMond interview

Michael said:

Everybody's out to get poor Greg. Hinault broke
his promise. Boo hoo.

I rather enjoyed the LeMond retrospective. Especially the part about
how he came to the Tour in 1991 only to find everyone was suddenly
going much faster than he could. I guess his lawyers have gotten him
to be more subtle about his accusations, since he only thinly veiled it
with his reference to how training hasn't changed at all for decades,
and how he implies that the only reason behind the rapid increase in
average speed of the Tour that he "experienced" (and much to his
dismay, couldn't keep up with) in the early 90's was doping.
Obviously, he hasn't been following r.b.r.
http://tinyurl.com/l4k4o

All I can say is that his wife looks about 1000x better now than she
did back in the 80's. Man, those were some really bad times for
fashion.

"Michael" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everybody's out to get poor Greg. Hinault broke
his promise. Boo hoo.

Also Hinault played dirty tricks on Greg during the '86
Coors Classic, especially during the Estes Park stage.

Greg LeMond should be saying what he's saying and
we should be listening.

Time to set the record straight.

"Jack Maars" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:6waqg.116994$Mn5.20854@pd7tw3no...

Quoted message said:

"Michael" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Everybody's out to get poor Greg. Hinault broke
his promise. Boo hoo.

Also Hinault played dirty tricks on Greg during the '86
Coors Classic, especially during the Estes Park stage.

Greg LeMond should be saying what he's saying and
we should be listening.

Time to set the record straight.

I suppose. But it sounds like he's crying.

Michael said:

Everybody's out to get poor Greg. Hinault broke
his promise. Boo hoo.

I watched part 1 of that LeMond interview.

Concerning that clip of Greg, after the TdF stage when he found out
his team lied to him about how far back Hinault was; Greg turns to
somebody off camera and says "Do you want me to punch you in the
face?". Any idea who LeMond said that to?

J. Spaceman

"Jason Spaceman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Michael said:

Everybody's out to get poor Greg. Hinault broke
his promise. Boo hoo.

I watched part 1 of that LeMond interview.

Concerning that clip of Greg, after the TdF stage when he found out
his team lied to him about how far back Hinault was; Greg turns to
somebody off camera and says "Do you want me to punch you in the
face?". Any idea who LeMond said that to?

J. Spaceman

You know what? Either punch the guy or don't punch the guy.
But don't cry about it a hundred years later on tv.

"Michael" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You know what? Either punch the guy or don't punch the guy.
But don't cry about it a hundred years later on tv.

Mike, it wasn't that long ago.

Everyone remembers what they were doing and where
they were at the moment they first heard the news that
Greg's brother-in-law Pat Blades had just put sixty
number-two-size shotgun pellets into Greg.

It's too bad the fuss over Doctor Fuentes and
Doctor Ferrari has overshadowed the questions
regarding the Hinault / Doctor Maigret relationship.

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 03:48:37 GMT, "Jack Maars" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Everyone remembers what they were doing and where
they were at the moment they first heard the news that
Greg's brother-in-law Pat Blades had just put sixty
number-two-size shotgun pellets into Greg.

"Everyone" is a pretty big word.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 04 Jul 2006 03:48:37 GMT, "Jack Maars" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Everyone remembers what they were doing and where
they were at the moment they first heard the news that
Greg's brother-in-law Pat Blades had just put sixty
number-two-size shotgun pellets into Greg.

"Everyone" is a pretty big word.

Well it was one of those EVENTS, you know, like
Kennedy taking a slug to the back of his head , 9/11,
and Princess Di in that motor vehicle accident.

"Jason Spaceman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Concerning that clip of Greg, after the TdF stage when he found out
his team lied to him about how far back Hinault was; Greg turns to
somebody off camera and says "Do you want me to punch you in the
face?". Any idea who LeMond said that to?

You've gotten your races mixed up. It was Zanoli asking Phinney.

On Mon, 3 Jul 2006 23:41:06 -0500, "Carl Sundquist" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

"Jason Spaceman" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Concerning that clip of Greg, after the TdF stage when he found out
his team lied to him about how far back Hinault was; Greg turns to
somebody off camera and says "Do you want me to punch you in the
face?". Any idea who LeMond said that to?

You've gotten your races mixed up. It was Zanoli asking Phinney.

It was Stephan Bumbeck to David Phinney at Killington.

JT

****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Quoted message said:

Jack Maars:
Greg LeMond should be saying what he's saying and we should be listening.

Time to set the record straight.

No. He waited 15 years too long. I don't care about 15 years ago.

I used to love LeMond, now I can't stand him. He comes across as
jealous that he's no longer America's #1 all time greatest cyclist.
Rather than being satisfied with being the FIRST great American
cyclist, he casts aspersions on his competitors to try to make himself
seem better in retrospect. When he talked tonight about 1991 and PED's,
that is an attempt to tarnish Indurain. He never misses a chance to
trash Lance either.

"Razorback" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Jack Maars:
Greg LeMond should be saying what he's saying and we should be listening.

Time to set the record straight.

No. He waited 15 years too long. I don't care about 15 years ago.

I used to love LeMond, now I can't stand him. He comes across as
jealous that he's no longer America's #1 all time greatest cyclist.
Rather than being satisfied with being the FIRST great American
cyclist, he casts aspersions on his competitors to try to make himself
seem better in retrospect. When he talked tonight about 1991 and PED's,
that is an attempt to tarnish Indurain. He never misses a chance to
trash Lance either.

I think we should give it a year or two cooling off period.

Right now at this time we are still too much under the
Lance spell.

Quoted message said:

Jack Maars:

I think we should give it a year or two cooling off period.

Right now at this time we are still too much under the Lance spell.

Sorry Jack, but I was under the Big Mig spell from 1991-1995. I don't
want to hear 15 years later about it being tainted. I cheered in 1995
when Big Mig rode Lance off his wheel. I cringed in 1996 when Indurain
bonked in the mountains in his failed attempt at a 6th straight win.

My disgust with LeMond tonight stems from his comment about 1991, not
anything about Lance. LeMond tonight took a potshot at Miguel Indurain.

Razorback said:

LeMond tonight took a potshot at Miguel Indurain.

At least it wasn't a potbelge shot.

yeahyeah said:

Especially the part about
how he came to the Tour in 1991 only to find everyone was suddenly
going much faster than he could.

He was fat... much fatter than Ullrich has ever been.

Quoted message said:

and how he implies that the only reason behind the rapid increase in
average speed of the Tour that he "experienced" (and much to his
dismay, couldn't keep up with) in the early 90's was doping.

If doping is the reason why the speed has increased since the '90s,
then what is the excuse for the rest of the century? The big increases
in average speed were from '26-'39, and '47-'60... nothing weird since
1990. Since 1903 the avg has gone up ~0.15km/hr/yr.

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/7038/touravgspd6ae.jpg

Ron Ruff said:

If doping is the reason why the speed has increased since the '90s,
then what is the excuse for the rest of the century? The big increases
in average speed were from '26-'39, and '47-'60... nothing weird since
1990. Since 1903 the avg has gone up ~0.15km/hr/yr.

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/7038/touravgspd6ae.jpg

Dumbass,

Click the link in pedalchick's message.

Robert Chung said:

Dumbass,

Click the link in pedalchick's message.

If you mean "yeahyeah", I read it and looked at the graphs. The
correlation of avg speed with distance is interesting, but since the
races have generally gotten shorter over the years, it doesn't seem
like convincing cause/effect. If the distribution of distance was more
random it would be better. Is there something I missed?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Ron Ruff said:

Robert Chung said:

Dumbass,

Click the link in pedalchick's message.

If you mean "yeahyeah", I read it and looked at the graphs. The
correlation of avg speed with distance is interesting, but since the
races have generally gotten shorter over the years, it doesn't seem
like convincing cause/effect. If the distribution of distance was more
random it would be better. Is there something I missed?

Yeah: given the highly compelling evidence of a non-doping factor which
is driving tour speeds up over time, "dope=tour speed" asserters are
going to need to control for that variable before they start throwing
around graphs like hockey sticks.

Here's the graphs for comparison:

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/7038/touravgspd6ae.jpg

http://anonymous.coward.free.fr/rbr/tdf.png

What's probably most remarkable is that the Chung Chart is NOT graphed
chronologically, and yet the tours still organize themselves roughly
that way, following the trend of shorter distances and higher speeds.

Also, the Chung Chart covers only the post-war era, a good decision
given how different pre-war tours were. The fit line for the data in
your preferred chart is just made up for pre-1946 data.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Ryan Cousineau said:

Also, the Chung Chart covers only the post-war era, a good decision
given how different pre-war tours were. The fit line for the data in
your preferred chart is just made up for pre-1946 data.

I included it because the long term trend follows the shorter term
trend. Why? Hell if I know... Lot's of variables for sure... but there
are also a lot of things changing since the 1980s too, like improved
aero, greater focus on delivering sprinters to the line (not a small
factor IMO), greater popularity (ie more top athletes pursuing pro
cycling), shorter courses, better roads, and... better dope.