Greg Lemond on doping problems...

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )

Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
of them.

Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
"stay at more than one hotel.
"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
"unauthorized contact,"
"
This seems like a very good idea
"increasing the number of randomly tested riders to 20"

Another good idea, but some riders have naturally higher levels.
"lowering the hematocrit limit to 46 percent - the upper end of the
range considered normal in medical tests".

Another good idea, but does not go far enough. Lifetime first use bans
must be established.
"He also wants to see higher penalties for those caught cheating, but
an additional consideration for those who would act as informants."

Seems to me this is already illegal...!!
""In LeMond's ideal situation, "There would be the ability to plea-
bargain prison sentences, so when riders get busted they can rat out
the system and come back to racing in much heavier testing." He went
on to say that doping "needs to be criminalized because they are
trafficking in illegal drugs. They are prescription drugs, but they
are being illegally distributed throughout the peloton.""

Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
want to be caught.""

In this case it's whether Taylors father has set a good example with
doping not the sport.
"Despite claiming that he was "the most optimistic I have been in
years" about the state of the sport, he still holds some reservations
about seeing youngsters starting their careers in professional
cycling. LeMond's contemporary Davis Phinney has a son, Taylor, who
just won a gold medal in the Junior World Championships, and LeMond
has mixed feelings about his success. "He could be one of our most
talented riders coming up," LeMond said.

"At first I thought, 'Oh, I'm so happy for him, and then I thought,
'Oh, I'm so sad for him.' Because I don't know if I was the parent,
and my son would have won the worlds that I would allow him to pursue
it on the professional level," LeMond continued. "I am optimistic that
there is a change and it's shifting, and that maybe Taylor Phinney can
have a chance like I did where you don't have to decide to either sell
your soul to be part of a sport, or having your dignity and be proud
of doing it on your own." "

Date: 01 Sep 2007 11:33:53
From: lewdvig
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 2:03 am, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 12:41 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Fuck Greg Lemond.
>
> I've got some memorabilia from his 1989 win. I was a pretty big fan of
> the guy. His behavior since he's retired disgusts me. If anyone wants
> the '89 memorabilia, let me know. Mostly magazines - Velonews,
> Winning, Sports Illustrated. I had a musette bag, but already threw it
> out. If no one wants the rest of it, it's going in the dumpster too.
>

Yeah, I kind of soured on him in the 90's.

First there was all the drama with rev. 1 of his bike company, and
then I finally saw the Canadian National Film Board documentary
'Inside Out.' It followed Steve Bauer as his career wound-down. There
is a scene where Greg and Steve are interviewed, and Lemond would not
shut up. I think Steve got to answer one question in a 10 min segment
even the documenatry was about him.

He seems to need a lot of acknowledgement and attention. If he could
just take a modesty pill and shut up, he would be revered. Right now
he is just annoying and destructive.

He has a right to be pissed, many class riders of the 80's had their
careers cut short because of the dawn of the EPO era. But spouting off
like he does makes me hate him almost as much as Dick Pound. These
guys should get slapped with libel or slander suits.

Date: 31 Aug 2007 20:50:55
From: Charles
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 7:36 am, RonSonic <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 07:46:32 -0700, cyclin...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
> >> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> >> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> >> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> >> next year's Tour as a team.
>
> >Well, they claim that they had a prospective sponsor but that they
> >purposely decided to close shop because of what appeared to be a
> >threat to any sponsors. I would have taken the same position. What's
> >happening now is a direct attack on anyone that would sponsor cycling.
> >What's pitiful is that LeMond is leading the charge. Apparently after
> >starting the million dollar contracts he now wants to eliminate them.
>
> >> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> >> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> >Cycle racing is about to go into the dumper again now that they've
> >finally risen to the level of a REAL(tm) professional sport.
>
> >> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> >> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> >> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> >Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
> >from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.
>
> All I can think is that he's so zeroed in on the dope angle that he doesn't see
> the damage. He claims to see the damage from doping (whatever the hell that
> might look like) but can't see that chaos and instability and schoolyard
> behavior is worse.
>
> Ron- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Greg, SHUT UP !!

Date: 29 Aug 2007 06:36:38
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 6:47 am, RonSonic <ronso...@tampabay.rr.com > wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:58:48 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
> >> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
>
> >> >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>
> >> >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> >> >of them.
>
> >> >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> >> >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> >> >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> >> >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> >> >"stay at more than one hotel.
> >> >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> >> >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> >> Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> >> >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> >> >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> >> >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> >> >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> >> >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> >> >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> >> >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> >> >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> >> >want to be caught.""
>
> >> Oh full bucking shit!
>
> >> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> >> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> >> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> >> next year's Tour as a team.
>
> >> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> >> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> >> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> >> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> >> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> >> Ron
>
> >Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
> >was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
> >incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
> >exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
> >not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.
>
> Even forgetting Basso, what if this bozo in Germany has paper that convinces
> someone at ASO that Contador shouldn't have started. It is entirely possible
> that Disco would've been excluded for something they could not possibly have
> known.

You're missing his main point. If you put a gun in Hizarks hands and
put him in a room full of puppies he would kill them all.

Date: 29 Aug 2007 16:54:45
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

cyclintom wrote:
> You're missing his main point. If you put a gun in Hizarks hands and
> put him in a room full of puppies he would kill them all.

Only if the puppies were alleged to have taken a banned substance.

Date: 29 Aug 2007 17:17:11
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:46d58997$0$22318$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> cyclintom wrote:
>> You're missing his main point. If you put a gun in Hizarks hands and
>> put him in a room full of puppies he would kill them all.
>
> Only if the puppies were alleged to have taken a banned substance.

Only if he imagined that the puppies might have been alleged to have used
banned substances.

Date: 29 Aug 2007 21:23:38
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:17:11 -0700, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com > wrote:

>"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:46d58997$0$22318$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>> cyclintom wrote:
>>> You're missing his main point. If you put a gun in Hizarks hands and
>>> put him in a room full of puppies he would kill them all.
>>
>> Only if the puppies were alleged to have taken a banned substance.
>
>Only if he imagined that the puppies might have been alleged to have used
>banned substances.

Sonsabitches'd deserve it.

Ron

Date: 29 Aug 2007 06:33:16
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 12:04 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca > wrote:
> In article <5jhsr2F3sv65...@mid.individual.net>,
> Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Frank Drackman wrote:
>
> > > What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after he
> > > already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
> > > concerning doping?
>
> > Floyd didn't confess to Greg over the phone, but his guilt was implied:
>
> > Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
> > Floyd: "What good would it do?"
>
> I'm very tetchy about reading an implied confession into that. I
> understand what you're getting at, and yes, the proper response of an
> innocent rider might be more like "I didn't do anything! What do I do
> now?"

Not if LeMond had implied that Floyd should "confess" whether he'd
doped or not just to get it behind him. You've seen LeMond's quotes
more than once. Does that guy strike you as making a lot of sense?

Date: 30 Aug 2007 16:39:41
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article
<1188394396.500935.287680@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com >,
cyclintom@gmail.com wrote:

> On Aug 28, 12:04 am, Ryan Cousineau <rcous...@sfu.ca> wrote:
> > In article <5jhsr2F3sv65...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Kyle Legate <lega...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Frank Drackman wrote:
> >
> > > > What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after he
> > > > already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
> > > > concerning doping?
> >
> > > Floyd didn't confess to Greg over the phone, but his guilt was implied:
> >
> > > Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
> > > Floyd: "What good would it do?"
> >
> > I'm very tetchy about reading an implied confession into that. I
> > understand what you're getting at, and yes, the proper response of an
> > innocent rider might be more like "I didn't do anything! What do I do
> > now?"
>
> Not if LeMond had implied that Floyd should "confess" whether he'd
> doped or not just to get it behind him. You've seen LeMond's quotes
> more than once. Does that guy strike you as making a lot of sense?

His brain is so fried with drugs that their is no reason to
even ask if he is or could be making sense.

--
Michael Press

Date: 29 Aug 2007 06:31:06
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 9:51 pm, "Tony S." <email_to...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>
> news:PQMAi.105$4J3.38@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> >> I don't know him at all but it sure seems that he needs constant
> >> attention from the media. He managed to make sure that he was a central
> >> part of both the LA bonus arbitration and the FL doping hearing.
>
> >> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after
> >> he already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with
> >> LA concerning doping?
>
> > And what are the chances that FL would not only hire someone who would
> > make a phony, sick phone call to Greg, during the arbitration hearings...
> > pretty darned slim. Even slimmer would be the chances that FL would
> > overhear such a call and not put a stop to it immediately. And yet it
> > happened.
>
> > I still believe in Floyd, but none of these guys are using their full
> > mental abilities (or at least I hope not!) an awful lot of the time. Maybe
> > introspective reasoning is one of those things top-level athletes have to
> > block out if they want to King?
>
> Normal mental reactions and abilities are deadened when they push themselves
> to ignore immense amounts of pain for hours, day after day -- particularly
> in Floyd's case with that bad hip. I mean, seriously, no cyclist comes to
> mind that is a brilliant thinker. Yes some a great tacticians. Bruneel and
> Armstrong come to mind. Armstrong also, because perhaps he was forced to
> read up on his cancer, seems to have come through his career as less of an
> oaf than he might have been otherwise.

You don't ride bicycles do you?

Date: 29 Aug 2007 13:59:10
From: Tony S.
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

<cyclintom@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1188394266.214631.19640@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 27, 9:51 pm, "Tony S." <email_to...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> "Mike Jacoubowsky" <mik...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:PQMAi.105$4J3.38@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> >> I don't know him at all but it sure seems that he needs constant
>> >> attention from the media. He managed to make sure that he was a
>> >> central
>> >> part of both the LA bonus arbitration and the FL doping hearing.
>>
>> >> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call
>> >> after
>> >> he already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had
>> >> with
>> >> LA concerning doping?
>>
>> > And what are the chances that FL would not only hire someone who would
>> > make a phony, sick phone call to Greg, during the arbitration
>> > hearings...
>> > pretty darned slim. Even slimmer would be the chances that FL would
>> > overhear such a call and not put a stop to it immediately. And yet it
>> > happened.
>>
>> > I still believe in Floyd, but none of these guys are using their full
>> > mental abilities (or at least I hope not!) an awful lot of the time.
>> > Maybe
>> > introspective reasoning is one of those things top-level athletes have
>> > to
>> > block out if they want to King?
>>
>> Normal mental reactions and abilities are deadened when they push
>> themselves
>> to ignore immense amounts of pain for hours, day after day --
>> particularly
>> in Floyd's case with that bad hip. I mean, seriously, no cyclist comes to
>> mind that is a brilliant thinker. Yes some a great tacticians. Bruneel
>> and
>> Armstrong come to mind. Armstrong also, because perhaps he was forced to
>> read up on his cancer, seems to have come through his career as less of
>> an
>> oaf than he might have been otherwise.
>
> You don't ride bicycles do you?

For 30+ years. Ok, I overstated the pain, which would come more rarely in
certain race conditions, but all that time on the bike - or in any endurance
sport - is mentally tough, not in a challenging way, but in a deadening way.
As someone who has done ultramarathons, and has also ridden many long bike
rides, this is my theory anyway.

-Tony

Date: 29 Aug 2007 17:14:54
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Tony S." <email_tonys@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:OYeBi.572$J65.473@trndny08...
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1188394266.214631.19640@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> You don't ride bicycles do you?
>
> For 30+ years. Ok, I overstated the pain, which would come more rarely in
> certain race conditions, but all that time on the bike - or in any
> endurance sport - is mentally tough, not in a challenging way, but in a
> deadening way. As someone who has done ultramarathons, and has also ridden
> many long bike rides, this is my theory anyway.

Theories are fine when you state them as such. However, these guys are not
riding to their maximum output most of the time and they're thinking a mile
a minute. The best riders are playing chess with their chances.

Date: 30 Aug 2007 00:45:38
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

>> For 30+ years. Ok, I overstated the pain, which would come more rarely in
>> certain race conditions, but all that time on the bike - or in any
>> endurance sport - is mentally tough, not in a challenging way, but in a
>> deadening way. As someone who has done ultramarathons, and has also
>> ridden many long bike rides, this is my theory anyway.
>
> Theories are fine when you state them as such. However, these guys are not
> riding to their maximum output most of the time and they're thinking a
> mile a minute. The best riders are playing chess with their chances.

Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.

Chess implies more thought than their actions indicate. It's hard to believe
people would put themselves in a position where they might receive someone
else's blood. Do you think it likely that Vino gave much thought to the
possibility of getting Keschekins' (I'm sure I botched that spelling) blood,
or was he more concerned about the idea that he could get caught? My guess
is the latter.

Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Date: 30 Aug 2007 16:38:27
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article
<SqoBi.4293$JD.3646@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote:

> >> For 30+ years. Ok, I overstated the pain, which would come more rarely in
> >> certain race conditions, but all that time on the bike - or in any
> >> endurance sport - is mentally tough, not in a challenging way, but in a
> >> deadening way. As someone who has done ultramarathons, and has also
> >> ridden many long bike rides, this is my theory anyway.
> >
> > Theories are fine when you state them as such. However, these guys are not
> > riding to their maximum output most of the time and they're thinking a
> > mile a minute. The best riders are playing chess with their chances.
>
> Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.
>
> Chess implies more thought than their actions indicate. It's hard to believe
> people would put themselves in a position where they might receive someone
> else's blood. Do you think it likely that Vino gave much thought to the
> possibility of getting Keschekins' (I'm sure I botched that spelling) blood,
> or was he more concerned about the idea that he could get caught? My guess
> is the latter.
>
> Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.

Yes. All of that is a potlatch.
Who will sacrifice the most to
be acknowledged the winner.

--
Michael Press

Date: 30 Aug 2007 19:07:19
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

>> Chess implies more thought than their actions indicate. It's hard to
>> believe
>> people would put themselves in a position where they might receive
>> someone
>> else's blood. Do you think it likely that Vino gave much thought to the
>> possibility of getting Keschekins' (I'm sure I botched that spelling)
>> blood,
>> or was he more concerned about the idea that he could get caught? My
>> guess
>> is the latter.
>>
>> Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.
>
> Yes. All of that is a potlatch.
> Who will sacrifice the most to
> be acknowledged the winner.

Do you think these guys are even thinking about "sacrifice?" That implies
something somehow noble and purposeful. I don't think that's it at all. I've
never read anything amongst the confessionals lately saying "I knew I was
putting my life at risk, doing what I was doing, but the end justified the
means."

These guys are just simply looking for a way to get ahead, or keep from
getting left behind, period. There's nothing noble involved, no great amount
of thought. The "winner" isn't the guy who sacrificed the most, but rather
the guy who managed to get the max benefit without getting caught. Strategic
doping. Points for technique and ingenuity (not necessarily on the part of
the racer, other than knowing the right person). No points for "sacrifice.

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Date: 03 Sep 2007 15:13:11
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article <sJKBi.1663$z_5.407@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com >,
"Mike Jacoubowsky" <MikeJ@ChainReaction.com > wrote:

> >> Chess implies more thought than their actions indicate. It's hard to
> >> believe
> >> people would put themselves in a position where they might receive
> >> someone
> >> else's blood. Do you think it likely that Vino gave much thought to the
> >> possibility of getting Keschekins' (I'm sure I botched that spelling)
> >> blood,
> >> or was he more concerned about the idea that he could get caught? My
> >> guess
> >> is the latter.
> >>
> >> Wrong game, Tom. Think Russian Roulette.
> >
> > Yes. All of that is a potlatch.
> > Who will sacrifice the most to
> > be acknowledged the winner.
>
> Do you think these guys are even thinking about "sacrifice?" That implies
> something somehow noble and purposeful. I don't think that's it at all. I've
> never read anything amongst the confessionals lately saying "I knew I was
> putting my life at risk, doing what I was doing, but the end justified the
> means."
>
> These guys are just simply looking for a way to get ahead, or keep from
> getting left behind, period. There's nothing noble involved, no great amount
> of thought. The "winner" isn't the guy who sacrificed the most, but rather
> the guy who managed to get the max benefit without getting caught. Strategic
> doping. Points for technique and ingenuity (not necessarily on the part of
> the racer, other than knowing the right person). No points for "sacrifice.

I do not consider sacrifice to be a good thing, particularly
when it is competitive sacrificing. Please do not read into
this that I consider self-interest the foremost good.

--
Michael Press

Date: 29 Aug 2007 04:48:28
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article
<1188200509.963365.57830@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
"hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com > wrote:

> (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>
> Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> of them.
>
> Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> "stay at more than one hotel.
> "keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> "unauthorized contact,"
> "
> This seems like a very good idea
> "increasing the number of randomly tested riders to 20"
>
> Another good idea, but some riders have naturally higher levels.
> "lowering the hematocrit limit to 46 percent - the upper end of the
> range considered normal in medical tests".
>
> Another good idea, but does not go far enough. Lifetime first use bans
> must be established.
> "He also wants to see higher penalties for those caught cheating, but
> an additional consideration for those who would act as informants."
>
> Seems to me this is already illegal...!!
> ""In LeMond's ideal situation, "There would be the ability to plea-
> bargain prison sentences, so when riders get busted they can rat out
> the system and come back to racing in much heavier testing." He went
> on to say that doping "needs to be criminalized because they are
> trafficking in illegal drugs. They are prescription drugs, but they
> are being illegally distributed throughout the peloton.""
>
>
> Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> "LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> want to be caught.""
>
> In this case it's whether Taylors father has set a good example with
> doping not the sport.
> "Despite claiming that he was "the most optimistic I have been in
> years" about the state of the sport, he still holds some reservations
> about seeing youngsters starting their careers in professional
> cycling. LeMond's contemporary Davis Phinney has a son, Taylor, who
> just won a gold medal in the Junior World Championships, and LeMond
> has mixed feelings about his success. "He could be one of our most
> talented riders coming up," LeMond said.
>
> "At first I thought, 'Oh, I'm so happy for him, and then I thought,
> 'Oh, I'm so sad for him.' Because I don't know if I was the parent,
> and my son would have won the worlds that I would allow him to pursue
> it on the professional level," LeMond continued. "I am optimistic that
> there is a change and it's shifting, and that maybe Taylor Phinney can
> have a chance like I did where you don't have to decide to either sell
> your soul to be part of a sport, or having your dignity and be proud
> of doing it on your own." "

I heard that Greg Lemond is addicted to fentanyl.
He injects it under his tongue so the marks never show.

--
Michael Press

Date: 28 Aug 2007 16:43:32
From: billyroll
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 7:46 am, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> Tom Kunich wrote:
> >>> I see that you and he have a lot in common.
> Donald Munro wrote:
> >> I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
> >> for a rbr Pulitzer.
> Bob Schwartz wrote:
> > I'll nominate you for an rbr Nobel if you think it'll help.
>
> If I make peace between Kveck and Kunich then I get a rbr Nobel
> peace prize (or is that piece price). If I cure Kunich of his
> delusions then I get the rbr Nobel prize for medicine. What must
> I do to get the physics prize ?

Figure out a way to transport Kunich from his parallel delusional
universe to our real one.
-BR-

Date: 29 Aug 2007 08:54:49
From: Kyle Legate
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

billyroll wrote:
> On Aug 28, 7:46 am, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>>> I see that you and he have a lot in common.
>> Donald Munro wrote:
>>>> I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
>>>> for a rbr Pulitzer.
>> Bob Schwartz wrote:
>>> I'll nominate you for an rbr Nobel if you think it'll help.
>> If I make peace between Kveck and Kunich then I get a rbr Nobel
>> peace prize (or is that piece price). If I cure Kunich of his
>> delusions then I get the rbr Nobel prize for medicine. What must
>> I do to get the physics prize ?
>
> Figure out a way to transport Kunich from his parallel delusional
> universe to our real one.
> -BR-
>
Better: transport him to an even further universe with no communication
with this one.

Date: 29 Aug 2007 09:51:41
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Tom Kunich wrote:
>> >>> I see that you and he have a lot in common.

Donald Munro wrote:
>> >> I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
>> >> for a rbr Pulitzer.

Bob Schwartz wrote:
>> > I'll nominate you for an rbr Nobel if you think it'll help.

Donald Munro wrote:
>> If I make peace between Kveck and Kunich then I get a rbr Nobel
>> peace prize (or is that piece price). If I cure Kunich of his
>> delusions then I get the rbr Nobel prize for medicine. What must
>> I do to get the physics prize ?

billyroll wrote:
> Figure out a way to transport Kunich from his parallel delusional
> universe to our real one.

Have you considered the consequences for our universe ?
I'd hate to be remembered as the mad scientist who unleashed
an unconscious irony black hole into our universe.

Anyway Kunich occupies several parallel universes simultaneously.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 06:31:45
From: Scott
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 2:34 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 12:26 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>
> > > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>
> > > > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> > > > >of them.
>
> > > > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> > > > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> > > > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> > > > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> > > > >"stay at more than one hotel.
> > > > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> > > > >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> > > > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> > > > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> > > > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> > > > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> > > > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> > > > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> > > > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> > > > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> > > > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> > > > >want to be caught.""
>
> > > > Oh full bucking shit!
>
> > > > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> > > > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> > > > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> > > > next year's Tour as a team.
>
> > > > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> > > > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> > > > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> > > > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> > > > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> > > > Ron
>
> > > Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
> > > was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
> > > incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
> > > exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
> > > not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> One has to look at the overall situation and how it affects the teams
> reputation. Sponsors are fed up and very leary of being tainted with
> dopers. In my mind hiring Basso posed a unacceptable risk to the
> teams reputation.
>
>
>
> > Yeah, but if the Puerto thing had fizzled out, Bruyneel would be
> > considered a brilliant director for having hired Basso. I applaud him
> > for having the courage to take an 'innocent until proven guilty'
> > approach in his dealings with Basso. I doubt you agree, given your
> > history of calls for lifetime bans for even first time drug
> > infractions. You strike me as somewhat inflexible and a bit too
> > 'black and white' in your thinking.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Well, at least you admit it's your view, which implies that others
might see it differently.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 04:52:42
From: dustoyevsky@mac.com
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 28, 3:34 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:

> One has to look at the overall situation and how it affects the teams
> reputation. Sponsors are fed up and very leary of being tainted with
> dopers. In my mind hiring Basso posed a unacceptable risk to the
> teams reputation.

It's a witch hunt.

Those who wanted to see the building burned along with the witches are
having their day.

If the smoke ever clears, we'll go back to bad rules and bad
enforcement.

The riders, and the sport itself, are pawns. And scapegoats.

Onward Christian Soldiers! --D-y

Date: 28 Aug 2007 16:41:38
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

dustoyevsky@mac.com wrote:
> The riders, and the sport itself, are pawns. And scapegoats.
> Onward Christian Soldiers! --D-y

Don't say that loudly lest Osama hears and starts targetting
dopers too. One sets of fanatic fruitcake targetters is enough
for anyone.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 01:34:45
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 12:26 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>
> > > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> > > >of them.
>
> > > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> > > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> > > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> > > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> > > >"stay at more than one hotel.
> > > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> > > >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> > > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> > > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> > > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> > > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> > > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> > > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> > > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> > > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> > > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> > > >want to be caught.""
>
> > > Oh full bucking shit!
>
> > > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> > > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> > > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> > > next year's Tour as a team.
>
> > > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> > > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> > > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> > > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> > > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> > > Ron
>
> > Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
> > was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
> > incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
> > exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
> > not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

One has to look at the overall situation and how it affects the teams
reputation. Sponsors are fed up and very leary of being tainted with
dopers. In my mind hiring Basso posed a unacceptable risk to the
teams reputation.

> Yeah, but if the Puerto thing had fizzled out, Bruyneel would be
> considered a brilliant director for having hired Basso. I applaud him
> for having the courage to take an 'innocent until proven guilty'
> approach in his dealings with Basso. I doubt you agree, given your
> history of calls for lifetime bans for even first time drug
> infractions. You strike me as somewhat inflexible and a bit too
> 'black and white' in your thinking.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 09:50:23
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Tue, 28 Aug 2007 01:34:45 -0700, "hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>On Aug 27, 12:26 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>>
>> > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
>> > > wrote:
>>
>> > > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>>
>> > > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
>> > > >of them.
>>
>> > > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
>> > > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
>> > > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
>> > > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
>> > > >"stay at more than one hotel.
>> > > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
>> > > >"unauthorized contact,"
>>
>> > > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>>
>> > > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
>> > > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
>> > > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
>> > > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
>> > > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
>> > > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
>> > > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
>> > > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
>> > > >want to be caught.""
>>
>> > > Oh full bucking shit!
>>
>> > > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
>> > > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
>> > > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
>> > > next year's Tour as a team.
>>
>> > > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
>> > > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>>
>> > > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>>
>> > > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
>> > > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>>
>> > > Ron
>>
>> > Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
>> > was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
>> > incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
>> > exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
>> > not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>
>One has to look at the overall situation and how it affects the teams
>reputation. Sponsors are fed up and very leary of being tainted with
>dopers. In my mind hiring Basso posed a unacceptable risk to the
>teams reputation.

Dopers they can deal with. Hysterical mobs demanding that teams and riders be
excluded on the basis of rumor and extrajudicial rulings and other such
schoolyard crap is out of the question.

Ron

Date: 28 Aug 2007 16:52:21
From: Ro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com > wrote:
>(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>
>Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
>of them.

Greg Lemond IS a dope, and THAT is the problem. Period.
Ro

Date: 27 Aug 2007 13:36:38
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 12:26 pm, Scott <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>
> > > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>
> > > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> > > >of them.
>
> > > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> > > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> > > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> > > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> > > >"stay at more than one hotel.
> > > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> > > >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> > > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> > > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> > > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> > > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> > > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> > > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> > > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> > > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> > > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> > > >want to be caught.""
>
> > > Oh full bucking shit!
>
> > > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> > > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> > > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> > > next year's Tour as a team.
>
> > > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> > > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> > > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> > > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> > > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> > > Ron
>
> > Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
> > was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
> > incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
> > exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
> > not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah, but if the Puerto thing had fizzled out, Bruyneel would be
> considered a brilliant director for having hired Basso. I applaud him
> for having the courage to take an 'innocent until proven guilty'
> approach in his dealings with Basso.

Indeed! It sure is revealing just how committed to guilty until proven
innocent these so-called Americans really are.

Date: 27 Aug 2007 13:34:45
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 8:20 am, Donald Munro <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> cyclintom wrote:
> > Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
> > from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.
>
> His motivation is anything for a headline.

Don't sell Greg short. I think that he really wants to see a clean
sport but I don't think he understands all of the problems with trying
to get a clean sport. The guy has been a millionaire almost since he
was a teenager and he probably doesn't have a good perspective of
other riders.

I don't believe that he understands just how difficult the problem is.
If Bill Clinton was snorting coke in the oval office just how much
control are you going to have on guys who have to work a really piss
poor job if they don't do good at cycling?

Date: 27 Aug 2007 12:26:35
From: Scott
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>
> > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> > >of them.
>
> > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> > >"stay at more than one hotel.
> > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> > >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> > >want to be caught.""
>
> > Oh full bucking shit!
>
> > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> > next year's Tour as a team.
>
> > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> > Ron
>
> Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
> was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
> incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
> exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
> not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah, but if the Puerto thing had fizzled out, Bruyneel would be
considered a brilliant director for having hired Basso. I applaud him
for having the courage to take an 'innocent until proven guilty'
approach in his dealings with Basso. I doubt you agree, given your
history of calls for lifetime bans for even first time drug
infractions. You strike me as somewhat inflexible and a bit too
'black and white' in your thinking.

Date: 27 Aug 2007 20:36:34
From: Jim Flom
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1188242795.342279.7220@57g2000hsv.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 27, 10:58 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com"
>> > <hizar...@yahoo.com>
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news)
>>
>> > >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
>> > >of them.
>>
>> > >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
>> > >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
>> > >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
>> > >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
>> > >"stay at more than one hotel.
>> > >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
>> > >"unauthorized contact,"
>>
>> > Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>>
>> > >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
>> > >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
>> > >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
>> > >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
>> > >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
>> > >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
>> > >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
>> > >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
>> > >want to be caught.""
>>
>> > Oh full bucking shit!
>>
>> > The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping
>> > hysteria
>> > has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is
>> > so insane
>> > that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able
>> > to enter
>> > next year's Tour as a team.
>>
>> > All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you,
>> > or going
>> > with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't
>> > invited.
>>
>> > Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>>
>> > Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a
>> > cooler,
>> > older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>>
>> > Ron
>>
>> Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
>> was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
>> incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
>> exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
>> not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> Yeah, but if the Puerto thing had fizzled out, Bruyneel would be
> considered a brilliant director for having hired Basso. I applaud him
> for having the courage to take an 'innocent until proven guilty'
> approach in his dealings with Basso. I doubt you agree, given your
> history of calls for lifetime bans for even first time drug
> infractions. You strike me as somewhat inflexible and a bit too
> 'black and white' in your thinking.

Bruyneel was happy to bring on Basso because Basso is a proven contender who
had a reputation as a doper. It would be easy to cultivate Basso's
potential in a program that included doping, but was sophisticated enough to
beat the controls.

Date: 27 Aug 2007 09:58:48
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>
> >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> >of them.
>
> >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
> >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
> >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
> >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
> >"stay at more than one hotel.
> >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
> >"unauthorized contact,"
>
> Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>
> >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
> >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
> >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
> >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
> >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
> >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
> >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
> >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
> >want to be caught.""
>
> Oh full bucking shit!
>
> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> next year's Tour as a team.
>
> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
> Ron

Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 09:47:35
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:58:48 -0700, "hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>>
>> >Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
>> >of them.
>>
>> >Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
>> >dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
>> >whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
>> >visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
>> >"stay at more than one hotel.
>> >"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
>> >"unauthorized contact,"
>>
>> Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.
>>
>> >Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
>> >"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
>> >Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
>> >would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
>> >month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
>> >he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
>> >because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
>> >getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
>> >want to be caught.""
>>
>> Oh full bucking shit!
>>
>> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
>> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
>> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
>> next year's Tour as a team.
>>
>> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
>> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>>
>> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>>
>> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
>> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>>
>> Ron
>
>Discovery is largely responsible for it's own breakup. They knew there
>was already a lot of controversy flying around after the Landis
>incident. To hire a rider like Basso who had questionable reputation
>exposed Discovery to unacceptable risks. I am amazed that Bruyneel did
>not fully realize the implications of hiring Basso.

Even forgetting Basso, what if this bozo in Germany has paper that convinces
someone at ASO that Contador shouldn't have started. It is entirely possible
that Disco would've been excluded for something they could not possibly have
known.

I've got a questionable reputation and that doesn't affect my employment. What
affects your employment are facts and rulings and sentences and evidence, not
reputation.

I CHEER for the teams that don't comply with that informal blacklist. The idea
of word getting around and teams agreeing to not hire people that the other
teams don't want to race against is contrary to modern sporting principles.
Maybe baseball could get away with that in its whites only day (with room for
some "Cubans") but that isn't how sport works now.

Ron

Date: 28 Aug 2007 21:16:03
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article <jc98d3hhgoslch3gksea9nk9cu3ag7har3@4ax.com >,
RonSonic <ronsonic@tampabay.rr.com > wrote:

> Even forgetting Basso, what if this bozo in Germany has paper that convinces
> someone at ASO that Contador shouldn't have started. It is entirely possible
> that Disco would've been excluded for something they could not possibly have
> known.

Suppose they try to exclude them after the fact?

> I CHEER for the teams that don't comply with that informal blacklist. The
> idea of word getting around and teams agreeing to not hire people that the other
> teams don't want to race against is contrary to modern sporting principles.

Well, I don't think it's just sporting principles that this kind of tactic is
contrary to.

--
tanx,
Howard

Faberge eggs are elegant but I prefer Faberge bacon.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Date: 27 Aug 2007 10:04:12
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

<hizark21@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1188200509.963365.57830@i13g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> (http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>
> Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
> of them.

snip...

> Seems to me this is already illegal...!!
> ""In LeMond's ideal situation, "There would be the ability to plea-
> bargain prison sentences, so when riders get busted they can rat out
> the system and come back to racing in much heavier testing." He went
> on to say that doping "needs to be criminalized because they are
> trafficking in illegal drugs. They are prescription drugs, but they
> are being illegally distributed throughout the peloton.""

If Greg is ever accused and ends up on the stand he can avoid prison by
pleading not guilty by reason of insanity.
--
Marty

Date: 27 Aug 2007 07:46:32
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
> next year's Tour as a team.

Well, they claim that they had a prospective sponsor but that they
purposely decided to close shop because of what appeared to be a
threat to any sponsors. I would have taken the same position. What's
happening now is a direct attack on anyone that would sponsor cycling.
What's pitiful is that LeMond is leading the charge. Apparently after
starting the million dollar contracts he now wants to eliminate them.

> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.

Cycle racing is about to go into the dumper again now that they've
finally risen to the level of a REAL(tm) professional sport.

> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>
> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.

Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 10:36:56
From: RonSonic
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 07:46:32 -0700, cyclintom@gmail.com wrote:

>On Aug 27, 6:35 am, Hobbes@spnb&s.com wrote:
>> The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
>> has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
>> that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
>> next year's Tour as a team.
>
>Well, they claim that they had a prospective sponsor but that they
>purposely decided to close shop because of what appeared to be a
>threat to any sponsors. I would have taken the same position. What's
>happening now is a direct attack on anyone that would sponsor cycling.
>What's pitiful is that LeMond is leading the charge. Apparently after
>starting the million dollar contracts he now wants to eliminate them.
>
>> All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
>> with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.
>
>Cycle racing is about to go into the dumper again now that they've
>finally risen to the level of a REAL(tm) professional sport.
>
>> Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.
>>
>> Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
>> older head can provide is really going to help the sport.
>
>Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
>from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.

All I can think is that he's so zeroed in on the dope angle that he doesn't see
the damage. He claims to see the damage from doping (whatever the hell that
might look like) but can't see that chaos and instability and schoolyard
behavior is worse.

Ron

Date: 27 Aug 2007 17:20:04
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

cyclintom wrote:
> Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
> from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.

His motivation is anything for a headline.

Date: 27 Aug 2007 18:44:18
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Date: 28 Aug 2007 09:53:07
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

cyclintom wrote:
>>> Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
>>> from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.

Donald Munro wrote:
>> His motivation is anything for a headline.

Tom Kunich wrote:
> I see that you and he have a lot in common.

Bendan,
I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
for a rbr Pulitzer.

Date: 28 Aug 2007 14:15:56
From: Bob Schwartz
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Donald Munro wrote:
> cyclintom wrote:
>>>> Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
>>>> from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.
>
> Donald Munro wrote:
>>> His motivation is anything for a headline.
>
> Tom Kunich wrote:
>> I see that you and he have a lot in common.
>
> Bendan,
> I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
> for a rbr Pulitzer.

I'll nominate you for an rbr Nobel if you think it'll help.

Bob Schwartz

Date: 28 Aug 2007 16:46:25
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> I see that you and he have a lot in common.

Donald Munro wrote:
>> I do anything to get a rbr headline, I may even be in line
>> for a rbr Pulitzer.

Bob Schwartz wrote:
> I'll nominate you for an rbr Nobel if you think it'll help.

If I make peace between Kveck and Kunich then I get a rbr Nobel
peace prize (or is that piece price). If I cure Kunich of his
delusions then I get the rbr Nobel prize for medicine. What must
I do to get the physics prize ?

Date: 28 Aug 2007 18:09:27
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:46d43619$0$31162$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> What must I do to get the physics prize ?

Get your head out of your ass so that you can shit?

Date: 28 Aug 2007 18:20:06
From: Ewoud Dronkert
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Donald Munro schreef:
> If I make peace between Kveck and Kunich then I get a rbr Nobel
> peace prize (or is that piece price). If I cure Kunich of his
> delusions then I get the rbr Nobel prize for medicine. What must
> I do to get the physics prize ?

Produce a better Chung Chart than Weiner.

--
E. Dronkert

Date: 27 Aug 2007 11:54:10
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:46d2ec76$0$22317$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> cyclintom wrote:
>> Well, it's always hard to get a clear picture of what someone is like
>> from headlines but I'm beginning to doubt the motivation of LeMond.
>
> His motivation is anything for a headline.
>

I don't know him at all but it sure seems that he needs constant attention
from the media. He managed to make sure that he was a central part of both
the LA bonus arbitration and the FL doping hearing.

What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after he
already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
concerning doping?

Date: 28 Aug 2007 08:14:57
From: Kyle Legate
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Frank Drackman wrote:
>
> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after he
> already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
> concerning doping?
>
>
Floyd didn't confess to Greg over the phone, but his guilt was implied:

Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
Floyd: "What good would it do?"

Date: 29 Aug 2007 13:36:09
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Kyle Legate" <legatek@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:5jhsr2F3sv65jU1@mid.individual.net...
> Frank Drackman wrote:
>>
>> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after
>> he already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with
>> LA concerning doping?
> Floyd didn't confess to Greg over the phone, but his guilt was implied:
>
> Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
> Floyd: "What good would it do?"

The quotes that you supplied are from Greg's version. I don't think that
the quotes are accurate.

I think that it was more like:

Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
Floyd: "What the F are you talking about?"

Date: 28 Aug 2007 07:04:33
From: Ryan Cousineau
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

In article <5jhsr2F3sv65jU1@mid.individual.net >,
Kyle Legate <legatek@hotmail.com > wrote:

> Frank Drackman wrote:
> >
> > What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after he
> > already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
> > concerning doping?
> >
> >
> Floyd didn't confess to Greg over the phone, but his guilt was implied:
>
> Greg: "If you have done something wrong, it's best to confess."
> Floyd: "What good would it do?"

I'm very tetchy about reading an implied confession into that. I
understand what you're getting at, and yes, the proper response of an
innocent rider might be more like "I didn't do anything! What do I do
now?"

But I can certainly hear a despairing-but-innocent Landis saying exactly
what he did. After all, he hadn't done anything wrong, so what good
would it do to confess? I also don't expect clear-headed articulation in
casual phone calls by ex-mountain bike racers. Indeed, I'd expect much
more of a politician or a lawyer on the phone, since rhetorical skills
and clear thinking off the cuff is pretty much part of the job
description.

I've certainly made bigger oral gaffes in my own life, and I'll let my
posts here speak for my general level of literacy and clear thinking.

You be the judge,

--
Ryan Cousineau rcousine@sfu.ca 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

Date: 27 Aug 2007 20:42:38
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

> I don't know him at all but it sure seems that he needs constant attention
> from the media. He managed to make sure that he was a central part of
> both the LA bonus arbitration and the FL doping hearing.
>
> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after
> he already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with LA
> concerning doping?

And what are the chances that FL would not only hire someone who would make
a phony, sick phone call to Greg, during the arbitration hearings... pretty
darned slim. Even slimmer would be the chances that FL would overhear such a
call and not put a stop to it immediately. And yet it happened.

I still believe in Floyd, but none of these guys are using their full mental
abilities (or at least I hope not!) an awful lot of the time. Maybe
introspective reasoning is one of those things top-level athletes have to
block out if they want to King?

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Date: 29 Aug 2007 13:41:17
From: Frank Drackman
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

Date: 28 Aug 2007 04:51:54
From: Tony S.
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

"Mike Jacoubowsky" <mikej1@ix.netcom.com > wrote in message
news:PQMAi.105$4J3.38@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net...
>> I don't know him at all but it sure seems that he needs constant
>> attention from the media. He managed to make sure that he was a central
>> part of both the LA bonus arbitration and the FL doping hearing.
>>
>> What are the chances that FL would confess to Greg in a phone call after
>> he already knew how Greg had represented the telephone call he had with
>> LA concerning doping?
>
> And what are the chances that FL would not only hire someone who would
> make a phony, sick phone call to Greg, during the arbitration hearings...
> pretty darned slim. Even slimmer would be the chances that FL would
> overhear such a call and not put a stop to it immediately. And yet it
> happened.
>
> I still believe in Floyd, but none of these guys are using their full
> mental abilities (or at least I hope not!) an awful lot of the time. Maybe
> introspective reasoning is one of those things top-level athletes have to
> block out if they want to King?

Normal mental reactions and abilities are deadened when they push themselves
to ignore immense amounts of pain for hours, day after day -- particularly
in Floyd's case with that bad hip. I mean, seriously, no cyclist comes to
mind that is a brilliant thinker. Yes some a great tacticians. Bruneel and
Armstrong come to mind. Armstrong also, because perhaps he was forced to
read up on his cancer, seems to have come through his career as less of an
oaf than he might have been otherwise.

-Tony

> --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
> www.ChainReactionBicycles.com

Date: 27 Aug 2007 09:35:07
From:
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 00:41:49 -0700, "hizark21@yahoo.com" <hizark21@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>(http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?id=news/2007/aug07/aug26news )
>
>Greg makes some interesting suggestions, but I have problems with some
>of them.
>
>Not really sure how much good this would do. After all they can always
>dope during the night or some other time. Secondly isolated from
>whom..?? One possiblilty would be to have unauthorized people from
>visting their hotel. This could be a bit onerous since the teams often
>"stay at more than one hotel.
>"keeping riders sequestered for two hours before races to eliminate
>"unauthorized contact,"

Keep 'em in a windowless motel like keirin racers.

>Oh please Greg this is just another typical cheap shot.
>"LeMond was also not afraid to take a thinly veiled shot at his fellow
>Tour winner Lance Armstrong, whose Discovery Channel team announced it
>would disband after ceasing its search for a new sponsor earlier this
>month. "I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving,"
>he told the newspaper. "I think a lot of people are leaving not
>because they can't get sponsors, but because [investigators are]
>getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't
>want to be caught.""

Oh full bucking shit!

The reason Disco walked off is that the hysterical, lawless antidoping hysteria
has made it impossible for them to obtain a sponsor. The situation is so insane
that they could not in good faith even promise that they would be able to enter
next year's Tour as a team.

All it takes is, what? Someone at ASO not liking something about you, or going
with national teams or some history about Contador and they aren't invited.

Who's going to invest $15,000,000 into a team under the present system.

Thanks for helping the riders out, Greg. The calm and perspective a cooler,
older head can provide is really going to help the sport.

Ron

Date: 27 Aug 2007 01:03:22
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Greg Lemond on doping problems...

On Aug 27, 12:41 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:

<snip >

Dumbass -

Fuck Greg Lemond.

I've got some memorabilia from his 1989 win. I was a pretty big fan of
the guy. His behavior since he's retired disgusts me. If anyone wants
the '89 memorabilia, let me know. Mostly magazines - Velonews,
Winning, Sports Illustrated. I had a musette bag, but already threw it
out. If no one wants the rest of it, it's going in the dumpster too.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.