I know someone who met a Supreme Court justice at Political fundraising parties twice. She said that he was charming in person, but was inhumane in his judicial decisions. A person’s public persona is not necessarily congruent with their other actions. I would like to believe that LeMonde is a good guy. I don’t know him personally. Leave the testing up to the testers. Even cheats can be nice guys, though I am not insupinuating that LeMonde ever cheated. I simply have never seen any evidence that he ever did.
I think the difference between doping pre-Epo and post-Epo was that you could compete-clean with a guy using pre-90 doping. I bet Lemons knew about 80's doping, but as long as he could still win, it didn't matter to him. That stopped being the case once Epo became widespread. The code of silence is a lot easier to adhere to, if you still think you can win. Epo changed the sport out of recognition.
It is such a joke to insinuate that Lemond was clean. EPO was made to treat injuries like he had when he was shot, it had been around for Clinical trials from 1983 in California - the illusion that Greg was clean is just funny
You could ride clean vs. a guy under steroids and amphetamines, but couldn't against a guy using EPO? In scientific literature there are doubts EPO has ever been of any use. It became prevalent in the '90s only because what they had used that far had become detectable.
Doping is only bad if it costs LeMond tour victories....It was OK in the 80s because he won, but in the 90s? He got old but the doping did not stop...well, now.....doping is BAD, says LeMond....slight hints of hypocrisy, Greg....slight hints of hypocrisy.
@@neutronalchemist3241 Amphetamines were relatively easy to detect. Steroids were harder to detect if they were used "correctly" but had much lesser effect on long distance events. They definitely affected track cycling and they probably skewed the performance of sprinters on the pro tour, but the principal benefits of anabolics wouldn't be so significant for GC riders, and domestique wouldn't have to juice to avoid getting blown out the back of the peloton.
This episode of the Roadman podcast was very insightful. LeMond spoke about other topics, too, including motor doping. LeMond still has a lot of connections and he is pretty sure that it still happens.
I would say that Roadman podcast was a bit intriguing, less insightful...As usual, Greg's words were carefully chosen..He never tells the whole story..
@@michaelsteven1090 Probably because he can't just accuse people without proof, but he knows how to say things without getting himself in trouble. We all know he is telling the truth.
@@leomarim5558 Are you serious.. trouble? What kind of trouble could Lemond get into by telling the truth?..He helps nobody or himself by dancing around it..Lemond is weak..
@@michaelsteven1090He could get in massive legal trouble if he accuses someone without a shred of proof. There could be defamation suits resulting in him having to spend hundreds of thousands on lawyers and possibly losing the suit as well having to pay millions.
Difference between the 80s doping and the 90s doping is that the 90s doping totally changed the logic of cycling since EPO was so efficient. You ended up with sprinters (Jalabert) getting best climber's jersey on the tour de France.
And now you have time trial specialists outclimbing Pantani, a cyclist winning everything on all terrain, TT specialist winning Mt Ventoux x2 while contesting sprints in the same Tour. A little previous gruppetto fodder turned into mutiple TdF winner etc while majority pretends it's all normal.
Yeah right! Lemond, a paragon of virtue! Indurain was elegant magic on a bicycle. I saw him many times. Lemond has got a serious weed up his bum imho. Now, the great Shaun Kelly is probably under suspicion. I am unsubscribing right after this.
7:56 in the years before EPO, doping was not anywhere near that level. EPO was the game changer. Steroids, Test, and HGH will not give you recovery the red blood cells the same as EPO. This is why the peleton in the early 90s changed and no one was taking a day off. They were going much faster and able to do it through consecutive days. You can't even compare the past decades to the EPO 90s. It's not even close.
@@cyclinghighlightssorry, still not up to par with EPO. The results and performance do not lie. Not even close. And the hour record is a single event. The difference with EPO was not only for one day, but for consecutive days in a row. They were not slowing down.
The US Olympic team that Greg Lemond was part of for the 1980 Olympics were massively blood doping for 1984, and EPO was launched commercially in 1988 when Lemond set his most impressive results - like a time trial record that still stands 35 years later - but he was clean we must understand. The fact that EPO went into clinical trials in 1982 in California and Greg improved tremendously from 82 to 83 is just a coincidence.
@@jenspetersen5865if everyone is doped, but Lemonds time trial record stands, thats impressive. Is he the only one that time trialed doped up. Merckx is still the goat no matter what metric is used.
I think the best thing about this video is how the title and image bait Lemond fans who fervently believe he was the only clean cyclist (or athlete) to smash fields doped to the gills.
Yeah, that's right, he should keep his mouth shut for his own good. All that generation were dopers, it's just Indurain was way better than LeMond and the rest.
@@YandrossA very short one, mostly Downhill, with a strong tailwind and advanced technology noone else used by then. He won because of material advantage. Not because of Doping.
PEDs are the worst thing for cycling, it has made the sport a boring and predictable spectacle. Would love to see natural cyclists having up and down days in the grand tours with GC changing daily.
Armstrong said after winning the world championship that he was out training and he was maxed out. Indurain went by like he wasn’t even working. And Lance knew Indurain was doping. So he said if everyone else is going to dope then I’ll show them how to dope. I don’t agree the way he ran over some of his friends but the doping was what everyone was doing.
He would have got away with it too, but he made too many enemies. And really, he wasn't very smart about doing those last few races. At least they didn't award those TdFs that were taken away to the second place finishers...
@@dangurtler7177If Lance won 4 or 5 lime some others did and stopped there. Well he probably would've gotten away with it. It sounds horrible (also clean or doped I didn't like Armstrong) I was a Beloki fan, and then early 2000's when El Imbatido came to the surface. I really liked his racing style so I was, and (also after his suspension) stayed a loyal Valverde supporter.
The 1998 TDF almost came to a halt, hotels were raided, people got arrested. I highly doubt that everyone had someone trailing their tourbus in 1999 carrying epo vials. Armstrong went above and beyond.
Nice video. Lemond look like legit but would not put my hand on the fire for any rider. It was vey interesting those 2 interviews,make me revive a lot of memories even I was 6 or 7 years old.
73km time trial?? That’s fucking insane, Id love seeing time trials like this… So would you say LeMond is one of the good guys in the cycling because he was a lot cleaner than the most?
Blood doping existed way before EPO. Although risky, athletes would use autologous transfusions (their own blood) and even riskier homologous transfusions (someone else’s blood). EPO reduced some of the risk but introduced clotting. The hematocrit limit that cyclists all test at, is an arbitrary level selected in the 90’s to keep cyclists from over doing it but it’s still above normal hematocrit levels. So basically every cyclist being at the limit says it all.
Claudio Chiappucci is prime example of what happens to your body when you dope to the max. It's like going to volunteer inside the containment chamber at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor. In the end, what good is fame and money when you're dead.
@@abdul-kabiralegbe5660 There is a Romanian who claims that he provided a motor for use in the pro peloton. Cancellara did seem to have some extra power at the end of that 2010 race as he did a seated acceleration over the cobbles away from Boonen.
Indurain was always a really good rider - he won a whole stage over three mountains alone in 89 and he won Paris nice and the criterium international etc but he seemed to really go up a notch in 91 - and suddenly was the imperious rider - it seems to me that he was one of those riders who had a really good response to epo - thoigh it’s odd that Delgado who was on the same team and assumedly had the same drugs available to him seems to go on the fade ( thoigh maybe Delgado feared too much scrutiny after the 88 controversy ) - there’s no doubt that ciapicci vastly improved from being a virtual nobody in the late 80s to suddenly winning the KOM - it did seem very odd at the time and it would make sense that lemond had such natural talent that he wouldn’t have been approached for doping or have seen the need for it.
His weight was kind of a running joke. He, as with many riders of that era, had incredibly obvious bulking and cutting phases. Why I couldn't possibly imagine. Lemond I mean.
he always seems to have an axe to grind with someone and has a selective memory depending if it suits his bitter ex-champ narrative. his undertone seems to always be no-one was as good as me.
@@cyclinghighlights And if he directly addressed that, I imagine the game of guilt by association would continue elsewhere. But nonetheless a good effort at working with the Roadman Podcasts efforts! A couple of points of note, after that 73km TT in '91, Lemond recounted later he was anything but euphoric, but shocked and demoralized that anyone could get near him with the form he had. Second, not sure he said he fainted on the road to Val Louron, he did discuss his suffering heat stroke after the previous stage to Jaca that effected him the next day.
But he WAS NOT keeping up with them. The difference was the speed and efforts did not let up. It continued on consecutive days. No recovery needed. That's EPO.
Indurain was the best doped among dopers, as Armstrong from 1999 to 2005. That’s why none dares to claim the first position in any TdF from the past decades. They were all in the same boat, but only the one with the best doctors and chemicals (and maybe with also the best physical shape) could reach the glory. And yeah I am saying this being Spaniard but that’s the harsh true
In a recent podcast, Armstrong laughed at how "Lemond was almost 20lbs heavier in '92 than he was when he won in 1990, but couldn't figure out why he couldn't win.".
Not sure that I always agree with you. After watching that interview with Greg I came away with the same viewpoint as you have. Willy Voet's book "Breaking the Chain", published in 1998 gives context to everything that Greg says in the interview.
Lemond who himself tried every trick to get an advantage like the illegal helmet in the 89 TdF. Lemond, who finished like 150th each Giro, to then being fully ready for the TdF. The Lemond with allergies and bullets in his body beating blood doped (not illegal back then IIRC)Theunissen and Rooks... Well, I like Geg, but the story of his seems too good to be true. I follow cycling since 1978, seen, read, heard it all.
@@GeorgeCrosley Upps, you forgot to mention the 105th, and the tons of DNFs in the Giro... If you think I did cherry picking, so you did... Fact remains: Lemond was the first who fully concentrated on the TdF, only the TdF. LA took this approach to the extreme.
@@GeorgeCrosley You do your hair splitting contest, I do mine... Cheery picking back or forth, in general, Lemond was not good in Giro, nor in Vuelta, given him being an "all time great never doped but ofc had TUEs". Facts.
This is disturbing. I want to believe in Lemond. He seems like a great guy with principles. I want to believe it was just iron injections that helped him in the final stage of the 1989 Giro d'Italia and that grit is how he became pro again after the hunting accident.
Just believe him. With his VO2Max he was doped naturally from the get go. Finished 3rd his very first year and was going to beat Hinault in 85. He was an absolute beast.
@@eddieguzman591 well blood transfusions have been around a very long time. The US Navy published a paper in 1947. But maybe he was sleeping at high altitude?
Yea, Greg was a physical freak. x2 on his V02 Max and heart stats. He was all legs, lungs, and heart. If he did cheat, he wouldn't be coming out against the cheaters. Who would want to put themselves under scrutiny like that unless they didn't cheat? Anyone who helped him cheat, after hearing him come out about it, would have spoke up, IMO. Greg's the genuine article.
Only questionable thing ever documented about Lemond was the "iron supplements" his soigneur had injected him with for anemia in the '89 Giro. Then again, it's entirely possible that that's exactly what he was told.
So I guess according to Greg Lemond he was the only guy ever not doping on the pro level 🤷🏻♂️. Yawn, same Lemond complaining every since he was no longer in the Peleton.
so according to Lemond, Indurain was doped but he was clean. Very convincing. Its obvious everyone was and is doped and also obvious Miguel was better than lemond
Indurain never won a non-TT tour stage in his five victories. (He won over Lemond on the climb in 1990.) He simply crushed everybody in the TTs and followed wheels in the mountains. It's hard for me to put Indurain ahead of Lemond. Indurain was a TT specialist and a smart GC rider who was on a good team.
Greg LeMond was an exceptional talent, but I find it very hard to believe that he never took a doping product during his entire career. LeMond is what fictional narratives are made of; and if it wasn't for his quip about Armstrong back in the day, we wouldn't even be talking about this. I wish the guy the best and hope I'm wrong, but I still respect him either way. Guy was a powerhouse.
@@cyclinghighlights The difference is JV admitted to doping; LeMond and his team have backed themselves into a corner where, for commercial and marketing reasons, there's no way he can come out and say, "Yeah, I took some amphetamine's back in the day, so what? It was a fundamental requirement."
@@matttilley8620stupid comment. First he won in 86 pre epo, second the TT in Paris was pancake flat and down wind with a clear aero advantage, IE the bars. Pedro Delgado with no aero bars finished within 2 minutes of him, hardly miraculous.
@@richardhall4830 Richard: Pleasure to meet you. Your rude introduction aside, I appreciate what you're saying. I am familiar with everything you said Greg did, and I am certainly not an authority on Greg's or anyone else's proclivities, past or present. My opinion is simply based on what I've learned about what goes on in the peloton since day one. And by that I mean I cannot think of a single Tour winner other than Greg who has won Le Tour sans some form of pick-me-up. I'd like to ask him what he thinks of that comment. Like I said, Greg was an amazingly gifted cyclist whose life turned to crap when Pharmstrong came along. I have huge respect for the guy and am only expressing an opinion based on the history of the sport.
You need to look at Paris Nice... Matteo is 6 foot 3 inches whose weight is listed at 143lb (which can't be true) who kept up with one the best in the world, Remco in the mountains (Remco is 5 foot 7 inches 137lb). They are lying about Matteo's weight to justify his climbing.
They tend to list the weights from very early on in their careers or even when they were espoirs. Just look at the weights listed for MvdP and Wout. There's no way in hell MvdP is much below 85kg nowadays, but he's listed as 75kg. Wout's not much lighter. The idea Remco weighs anywhere near 61kg now is laughable. It's been done almost since the dawn of time in cycling ... as the riders get bigger and stronger and more prominently muscled, listing lower weights fools enough people into thinking the W/Kg aren't *that* stratospheric (they are).
As the saying goes: "WHEN YOU POINT A FINGER AT SOMEONE, THERE ARE 3 MORE FINGERS POINTING BACK AT YOU." LeMond is the Snoop Dogg of the cycling business: always immersed in doping allegations and/or investigations while oddly avoiding being included in one, or any police scrutiny for that matter. Sounds to me like he's The Snitch of the cycling business. Not that I am pro-doping mind you. I would not be surprised if, eventually, he's found to have cooperated with the police. He's known to frolic around the big three, visiting teams, talking to the team members, the organization, etc. OR that he was also found to have doped. I think Lance Armstrong learned the snitch side of cycling from him. We do remember what Lance did to Mayo when the later whooped his ass at the DL Mount Ventoux stage right? Bitch quickly ran to the UCI to let them know that he had heard from someone that Ivan was on EPO. To me, an independent observer, it looks like LeMond had his own independent doctor at home prescribing him things. If my memory serves me right, LeMond used to "disappear" when getting ready for the big races. That's a red flag.
It's a shame but pro cycling is as straight as pro wrestling. I used to watch the tour until the mid-1990s, when it was clear something was amiss. Professionals justify their activities by saying everyone else is doping, or, why should people use natural genetic advantages when I train as hard as they do. I feel sorry for the clean ones, great riders who see their careers last a year or two because they are not on the same page.
@@barriem5318 Yea, he wouldn't be bringing it up at all if he did, IMO. Lance wasn't bringing up the subject, only defending when reporters would question him.
@@cyclinghighlightsstupid comment he gifted many like both alpine stages in 1993, the one he gifted Claudio in 91, the one given Leblanc at Hautacam. Plus in 95 his exhibition on la plagne is the ultimate beast performance, just he'd let zulle get 6 minutes up the road.
@@cyclinghighlights But he did win in 1990 when he let Lemond pull him and then he blasted past him like it was nothing,. Only reason he didn't do better in that tour was the order to wait for his teammate. Come on, be better than that.
Lemond was far from clean but he is right about Indurain. Mercx pointed out that he probably could have won any mountain stage he wanted to but gifted them to others - thats how he bought the favors Armstrong didnt do which came back and haunted him.
No doubt LeMond would have won 4 or 5 Tours had he not got shot. Now I kinda find it hard to believe that LeMond was the only clean cyclist out of all those cats who won the Tour and have been doping before and after him, but maybe so. And if so, that's awesome. With that said, I've always have been a fan!
Most of your videos are about doped cyclists. I would love to see at least one, once in a while that was about clean cyclists. It would be very refreshing. Please.
I love Greg. But he wouldn´t have won 5 Tours - not after 1990 at least. Remember: In 1991 Charly Mottet - a notorious non-doper - finished more than 5 minutes ahead of him. LeMond was done after 1990 due to illness and not only due to doping. PS: I´m sure LeMond would have won 5 Tours without his hunting accident though!
Hey was done. There were simply better athletes than he was used to competing against. I’m sorry but there is no way he could come close to competing against the likes of Pogi, Rogla and Jonas. Training improved, as did the actual conditioning of the athletes..
Lemond was doped to the eyeballs himself. How else did he beat the who's who of elite cyclists that were themselves doped up, particularly in an event like the tour, where doping gives such a huge advantage.. EPO was out in Greg's day along with Testosterone, phet, cortisone and the rest. Claiming he was clean just isn't credible. I have no problem with it; I'm just pointing it out.
His huge Vo2 max is the unicorn myth Lemond want to peddle to his cult. Vo2 max does mean jack shit, some of the highest isnt even recorded by cyclists.
Greg lost only 8 sec to Indurain in 91's 73KM TT (!!) being clean and destrying all other dopped top athletes - what a joke. Greg has no shame blaming everyone in the same things he did like any other top top pro rider had to do
Indurain was too big. As soon as he started climbing with real climbers...that was an obvious EPO indicator. Its not incredulous that Lemond didnt personally encounter doping in his team - since most doping was occurring outside of direct team management involvement. The manager may insinuate, but the riders were doing it privately. I dont think team - level doping programs really started until the mid 90's .
I think Indurain has stated in interviews that the victory he's most proud of is the Clasica de San Sebastian (1990), which is of course a one-day race. It says a lot, really. He was always very strong on the flats, but as you say, too big to be a stage race winner with serious climbing. On the other hand, he was always racing smart, never overclocking it on the climbs, reserving the extraterrestial performances for the chrono days. You'd watch the big stages in the mountains, it was so weird watching riders getting dropped while he was just sitting there setting the pace. And he never bullied other riders like Armstrong did, in more than one occasion. I think Indurain's low public profile and his obvious good standing in the 90's peloton is the real reason why it's unlikely he'll ever be outed like others did.
@@AG-el6vt: Doped or not, Indurain was a freak to watch. Still surreal to see that huge frame hauling himself seated over cols and riding 30 kg lighter dudes out of the way. Riis had to nearly kill himself to compete with that.
The average speed of the 1991 Giro had been nothing special. Only the 5th fastest that far. 1991 Tour had been marginally faster (0.12 km/h) than 1990 (when Lemond was over 9 minutes behind Chiappucci after the 10th stage, all regained in two "miraculous" mountain stages) and slower than 1988.
I don't think Lemond considered amphetamines as doping. He roomed for awhile with Fignon, who admitted to heavy and prolonged amphetamine use. So, whether Lemond used speed or not, he had to know its use had always been rampant in cycling.
Fignon didn't admit to prolonged amphetamine use, he admitted to taking it for training. Even then it was easily detectable and not used in races with dope tests.
@@nusreterzurumlu8772 Yes hidden power source and motors. Apparently in 2016 some Triathalete got caught with one. I am not aware of anyone in the pro pelton of road racing getting caught with one. But every time any one has a "unbelievable" performance, all of the paranoids start calling out either doping or mechanical doping. Cycling is like the boy who cried wolf, no one will ever believe them again, all generations of new cyclists from here on out will be considered cheaters because of the past, pretty sad. I say just enjoy the sport, the racing is awesome. If you can't live with the fact someone may or may not be cheating, stop watching.
Hinault and Lemond were fighting like cats and dogs at La Vie Claire. Only one side got the good stuff from owner Tapie. It wasn't the boys from North America.
Yeah, just like Ben Johnson was the cheating dope and good old Carl Lewis never touched the stuff?? Nah, I dont think Greg took EPO but i believe at times his memory may fail him
EPO was in clinical trials in California from 1983 and on when Clean Greg went from #48 to #6 in the world and it had been released for general use by 1988 when Greg had magic "iron shots" during the Giro to deal with anemia. It is funny how much Greg LeMond knows about doping with EPO, while he is the most likely rider to come in contact with it when it was not generally available, and it is quite certain that with his hunting accident he would have been administered EPO in the hospital. EPO was not outlawed until the late 1990'ties and you could not test for it till 2002. The lies that LeMond tells about himself are really tall, like anyone that ever beat him was cheating and on EPO, yet he set a time trial record that no doper in 35 years on better equipment and with better training as ever matched, and all because he had a VO2max of 92.5 (Jonas Vingegaard had VO2 Max of 97.0 before being scouted by Visma)
Bear in mind that it is very difficult to win a Tour without a team effort. In the 90s many feats were achieved by a single rider exhibiting a superhuman effort ... not believable... so I gave up watching cycling 😞
It's a delicate balance to claim the oxygen vector drugs are ethically worse than things like amphetamines and testosterone, which have less clear performance advantages. I don't know what LeMond may have used in his career, but it clearly wasn't EPO. But EPO was the game changer. It's what eliminated altitude as a factor, depriving riders from Colombia and Colorado their previous advantage in the hills. The massive focus today on altitude training shows that things aren't the same as they were in the 90's and 00's, when you got your altitude training via injection. Is there cheating today? It's likely, but it's not the same as it was then. The focus today is much more on training and nutrition and aerodynamics.
The painful thing about speculating about doping in cycling is that the only people who know for sure are the cyclists themselves. What makes it worse is that people will not believe them even if they say the truth, especially if the truth is different from what people expect. It's sad really. At some point, the only cyclists one may take a chance on as being clean are the domestiques whose performances pale significantly compared to their team leaders. Please, someone should invent time travel just so we can go back to observe what really happened (even if we can't necessarily change the past). It would feel good to know for sure rather than armchair speculation.
Of all the doping scandals the 80's era East German Women's Olympians -- they were pumped up with so much testosterone and other things that they pretty much all became men.
Cycling and doping, two words that are and always will be in perfect harmony. What’s available from your local chemist and GP is enough to get you started. Those that know, know. Those that don’t or think that top athletes don’t juice, unfortunately I have no words for them. Read about Franz Beckenbauer, your starter for 10.
Support us with a Super Thanks for More videos of the EPOque and the 80s too!
👍🏿 we all appreciate you
Will you make more of those longer retrospectives like from the 96-98 tours?
You are doing a much-needed and needed work, My Good Man!
I met LeMonde at a party in 2008ish. What a nice guy. As friendly as can be. He’s actually more friendly in person than on tv
I know someone who met a Supreme Court justice at Political fundraising parties twice. She said that he was charming in person, but was inhumane in his judicial decisions. A person’s public persona is not necessarily congruent with their other actions. I would like to believe that LeMonde is a good guy. I don’t know him personally. Leave the testing up to the testers. Even cheats can be nice guys, though I am not insupinuating that LeMonde ever cheated. I simply have never seen any evidence that he ever did.
Enjoyed the video, thanks for the shout out and tuning into the LeMond interview 🙏
Thanks! I’ll check another interviews too, good work
Thanks for covering the EPOque. It's Sandro Donati, by the way.
"Friend of the Channel" - well played sir!
I heard somewhere that he never said he didn't dope, just that he passed all the tests. Then years later he confessed.
I honestly wonder Riis' reaction if this channel's preoccupation with him is brought to his notice. Will he laugh or be pissed?
@@abdul-kabiralegbe5660 I hope he will laugh, I saw a lot of pics of him laughing, nice mouth
I think the difference between doping pre-Epo and post-Epo was that you could compete-clean with a guy using pre-90 doping. I bet Lemons knew about 80's doping, but as long as he could still win, it didn't matter to him. That stopped being the case once Epo became widespread.
The code of silence is a lot easier to adhere to, if you still think you can win. Epo changed the sport out of recognition.
Paul Kimmage didn’t said that
At least in grand tours or big races
It is such a joke to insinuate that Lemond was clean. EPO was made to treat injuries like he had when he was shot, it had been around for Clinical trials from 1983 in California - the illusion that Greg was clean is just funny
You could ride clean vs. a guy under steroids and amphetamines, but couldn't against a guy using EPO?
In scientific literature there are doubts EPO has ever been of any use.
It became prevalent in the '90s only because what they had used that far had become detectable.
Doping is only bad if it costs LeMond tour victories....It was OK in the 80s because he won, but in the 90s? He got old but the doping did not stop...well, now.....doping is BAD, says LeMond....slight hints of hypocrisy, Greg....slight hints of hypocrisy.
@@neutronalchemist3241
Amphetamines were relatively easy to detect. Steroids were harder to detect if they were used "correctly" but had much lesser effect on long distance events. They definitely affected track cycling and they probably skewed the performance of sprinters on the pro tour, but the principal benefits of anabolics wouldn't be so significant for GC riders, and domestique wouldn't have to juice to avoid getting blown out the back of the peloton.
This episode of the Roadman podcast was very insightful. LeMond spoke about other topics, too, including motor doping. LeMond still has a lot of connections and he is pretty sure that it still happens.
I would say that Roadman podcast was a bit intriguing, less insightful...As usual, Greg's words were carefully chosen..He never tells the whole story..
LeMond repeats what he tells in one book but it was funny he told that to one youtuber
@@michaelsteven1090 Probably because he can't just accuse people without proof, but he knows how to say things without getting himself in trouble. We all know he is telling the truth.
@@leomarim5558 Are you serious.. trouble? What kind of trouble could Lemond get into by telling the truth?..He helps nobody or himself by dancing around it..Lemond is weak..
@@michaelsteven1090He could get in massive legal trouble if he accuses someone without a shred of proof. There could be defamation suits resulting in him having to spend hundreds of thousands on lawyers and possibly losing the suit as well having to pay millions.
Another gem from the forever clean and not remotely doped *Cycling Highlights* 😁.
😂
Nicely done. I fancy Charly Mottet for the 91 Tour in an EPO-free scenario.
His entire team knew nothing about EPO? Ya, that's believable 🙄
It’s the always clean team of doped Legeay!
Difference between the 80s doping and the 90s doping is that the 90s doping totally changed the logic of cycling since EPO was so efficient. You ended up with sprinters (Jalabert) getting best climber's jersey on the tour de France.
And now you have time trial specialists outclimbing Pantani, a cyclist winning everything on all terrain, TT specialist winning Mt Ventoux x2 while contesting sprints in the same Tour. A little previous gruppetto fodder turned into mutiple TdF winner etc while majority pretends it's all normal.
Your exactly right.
In the 80s they were all clean 😂😂😂 the best line of the video ❤❤❤
Especially Greg he is just so squeaky clean.
And in the 70s
Lemond is correct. There is no way Indurain would have won a single TDF without massive pharmaceutical help.
And you think Lemond did it clean? 🤣
Los españoles no se dopan
Yeah right! Lemond, a paragon of virtue! Indurain was elegant magic on a bicycle. I saw him many times. Lemond has got a serious weed up his bum imho. Now, the great Shaun Kelly is probably under suspicion. I am unsubscribing right after this.
😂@@1903-x9m
@@lesbois53 LMAO
7:56 in the years before EPO, doping was not anywhere near that level. EPO was the game changer. Steroids, Test, and HGH will not give you recovery the red blood cells the same as EPO. This is why the peleton in the early 90s changed and no one was taking a day off. They were going much faster and able to do it through consecutive days. You can't even compare the past decades to the EPO
90s. It's not even close.
Meh. Blood transfusions were a huge evo too. Look the record of Moser, as you could see in our channel.
@@cyclinghighlightssorry, still not up to par with EPO. The results and performance do not lie. Not even close. And the hour record is a single event. The difference with EPO was not only for one day, but for consecutive days in a row. They were not slowing down.
@@FreeMTrider Probably but EPO was Easier to find and cheaper, so the access before were for less riders
The US Olympic team that Greg Lemond was part of for the 1980 Olympics were massively blood doping for 1984, and EPO was launched commercially in 1988 when Lemond set his most impressive results - like a time trial record that still stands 35 years later - but he was clean we must understand.
The fact that EPO went into clinical trials in 1982 in California and Greg improved tremendously from 82 to 83 is just a coincidence.
@@jenspetersen5865if everyone is doped, but Lemonds time trial record stands, thats impressive. Is he the only one that time trialed doped up. Merckx is still the goat no matter what metric is used.
Best cycling channel on the tube, great videos!
BREAKING: Cyclists in the 90's where doped.
In other news: Water is wet & the sky is blue.
Talk about doping and Indurain in Spain.
And shit stinks.
And Epstein didn't kill himself....
Still r
Water is full of fluoride and the sky is chem-trailed to deff!
Another masterpiece, i'm just sorry my father isn't around to watch these brilliant videos, he would of loved them. Cheers
*would have
@@graymcmic1419 thanks, he was a stickler for grammar 🤣🤣
Thanks mate, enjoy them!
I think the best thing about this video is how the title and image bait Lemond fans who fervently believe he was the only clean cyclist (or athlete) to smash fields doped to the gills.
Lance? Is that you?
@@foobarbazquux😂
Yup. You're winning, you're doping. Such a simple equation.
Lemonde was clean as a whistle. Rode the fastest time trial in history on a steel frame bike, days after cracking in the mountains.
Yeah, that's right, he should keep his mouth shut for his own good. All that generation were dopers, it's just Indurain was way better than LeMond and the rest.
Santa is real too
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
On COBBLES (partially)!
@@YandrossA very short one, mostly Downhill, with a strong tailwind and advanced technology noone else used by then.
He won because of material advantage. Not because of Doping.
Never doped or just a “non-responder”. I guess the magical B12 shots just stopped being enough.
Magical indeed.
A non-responder. There is no way he was clean.
PEDs are the worst thing for cycling, it has made the sport a boring and predictable spectacle.
Would love to see natural cyclists having up and down days in the grand tours with GC changing daily.
Next Video :
- MOST DOPED Milan SanRemo races ever
2024 editition will be!
Great vid again, chapeau....
Have seen this interview on my timeline....can't stomach watching it tbh.....🤦♂️🤦♂️
It's all Lemond's fault. Why didn't he subscribe to Cycling Highlights. I mean . . . it's free! I did!
I too chuckled when I heard that 😆😆. Time travel is real 😆😆.
In the 80's they where all flying round on steroids and testosterone - epo came and was the golden chalice
Except for the ones who died while using it without the high-priced doping doctors to monitor their EPO usage.
@@dangurtler7177 as it was in the clubs too - no Drs there either
Armstrong said after winning the world championship that he was out training and he was maxed out. Indurain went by like he wasn’t even working. And Lance knew Indurain was doping. So he said if everyone else is going to dope then I’ll show them how to dope. I don’t agree the way he ran over some of his friends but the doping was what everyone was doing.
He would have got away with it too, but he made too many enemies. And really, he wasn't very smart about doing those last few races. At least they didn't award those TdFs that were taken away to the second place finishers...
@@dangurtler7177If Lance won 4 or 5 lime some others did and stopped there. Well he probably would've gotten away with it.
It sounds horrible (also clean or doped I didn't like Armstrong) I was a Beloki fan, and then early 2000's when El Imbatido came to the surface. I really liked his racing style so I was, and (also after his suspension) stayed a loyal Valverde supporter.
The 1998 TDF almost came to a halt, hotels were raided, people got arrested. I highly doubt that everyone had someone trailing their tourbus in 1999 carrying epo vials. Armstrong went above and beyond.
Lance said he started doping in 1992. He wasn’t clean in 1993, of EPO don’t know but doped was. Also he rode brilliant that day.
NOT everyone. Many for sure but ‘everyone’ disrespects those whose careers suffered by cycling clean…
Nice video. Lemond look like legit but would not put my hand on the fire for any rider. It was vey interesting those 2 interviews,make me revive a lot of memories even I was 6 or 7 years old.
Another brilliant video. It's about time lemond was the topic on this channel.
73km time trial?? That’s fucking insane, Id love seeing time trials like this…
So would you say LeMond is one of the good guys in the cycling because he was a lot cleaner than the most?
And close to 90km in 1987
A real time trial lol we need 50+km TT back honestly
Absolutely- long TT & TTT : get rid of the radios …… it would change shit real quick
An unbelievable performance by Pogecar...
@@theeverlastingspiral So you want the doping back as well? These are humans you know.
Blood doping existed way before EPO. Although risky, athletes would use autologous transfusions (their own blood) and even riskier homologous transfusions (someone else’s blood). EPO reduced some of the risk but introduced clotting. The hematocrit limit that cyclists all test at, is an arbitrary level selected in the 90’s to keep cyclists from over doing it but it’s still above normal hematocrit levels. So basically every cyclist being at the limit says it all.
Claudio Chiappucci is prime example of what happens to your body when you dope to the max. It's like going to volunteer inside the containment chamber at the Chernobyl nuclear reactor. In the end, what good is fame and money when you're dead.
We made a Chiappucci’s vid
did Chia pucci die ?
@@dannyho6786 No, he's alive.
@@timgoodall636well, he's dead to me! 😂
You mean Pantani.
Greg has gotten the world to believe that he was the only one clean back then.....riiiiiiiiiight, Greg.
The awkward smiles of a bent champion on the podium is difficult to disguise. Please do a video on the Roche and Kelly epoch.
Yes Lemonde was a miracle worker. The only one who rode clean against doped riders and win three TDF.
Are you planning on doing a video about motor doping?
Not a lot of evidence to go by.
Only if Tudor’s Clasicomano Luigi flies in Giro
Iirc Durianrider did a good video on this of Cancellara vs Boonen at the 2010 Tour of Flanders
@@Hbirdman1994 That incident is like the golden standard everyone refers to.
@@abdul-kabiralegbe5660 There is a Romanian who claims that he provided a motor for use in the pro peloton. Cancellara did seem to have some extra power at the end of that 2010 race as he did a seated acceleration over the cobbles away from Boonen.
Great video as always guys. Is the 1998 Vuelta video you mentioned last year still going to come out?
Because of copyright matters we’ll try to no make it but whenever Vuelta 2024 will come probably we’ll make some vids about that Vuelta
@@cyclinghighlights Guess they're not friends of the channel.... Shame on them! Love your videos guys!
Indurain was always a really good rider - he won a whole stage over three mountains alone in 89 and he won Paris nice and the criterium international etc but he seemed to really go up a notch in 91 - and suddenly was the imperious rider - it seems to me that he was one of those riders who had a really good response to epo - thoigh it’s odd that Delgado who was on the same team and assumedly had the same drugs available to him seems to go on the fade ( thoigh maybe Delgado feared too much scrutiny after the 88 controversy ) - there’s no doubt that ciapicci vastly improved from being a virtual nobody in the late 80s to suddenly winning the KOM - it did seem very odd at the time and it would make sense that lemond had such natural talent that he wouldn’t have been approached for doping or have seen the need for it.
Safe to assume everyone was doping, everyone🤷♂️
Lemond: "I stayed clean and I have no ReGregs"
If a rider that heavy climbs that well you’ve got to question the results
His weight was kind of a running joke. He, as with many riders of that era, had incredibly obvious bulking and cutting phases. Why I couldn't possibly imagine. Lemond I mean.
Pity Party King. His mechanic knew about it and gave it to him as a iron supplements
he always seems to have an axe to grind with someone and has a selective memory depending if it suits his bitter ex-champ narrative. his undertone seems to always be no-one was as good as me.
No one was as good as him.
@@christaylor5924 he had his day in the sun i agree, but that's a big claim i don't agree with, sorry
So if lemon was keeping up with doped people, doesn't that implicate him, I maybe wrong
LeMond was so critical with Banesto in 1991 and 1992 (obviously) but we have to ask him about Renault 1984 or La Vie Claire 1985.
@@cyclinghighlights And if he directly addressed that, I imagine the game of guilt by association would continue elsewhere. But nonetheless a good effort at working with the Roadman Podcasts efforts! A couple of points of note, after that 73km TT in '91, Lemond recounted later he was anything but euphoric, but shocked and demoralized that anyone could get near him with the form he had. Second, not sure he said he fainted on the road to Val Louron, he did discuss his suffering heat stroke after the previous stage to Jaca that effected him the next day.
@@EMC2Scotia Nice anecdotes! Did you get them from a book or video? I'm interested. Thanks.
listen to the roadman podcast and you will hear lemond say it himself.
But he WAS NOT keeping up with them. The difference was the speed and efforts did not let up. It continued on consecutive days. No recovery needed. That's EPO.
Indurain was the best doped among dopers, as Armstrong from 1999 to 2005. That’s why none dares to claim the first position in any TdF from the past decades. They were all in the same boat, but only the one with the best doctors and chemicals (and maybe with also the best physical shape) could reach the glory. And yeah I am saying this being Spaniard but that’s the harsh true
Indurain was extremely popular among the peloton also in a way Armstrong wasnt so no one would single him out.
To fans Greg is: Our Lemond!
To haters Greg is: Sour Lemon!
In a recent podcast, Armstrong laughed at how "Lemond was almost 20lbs heavier in '92 than he was when he won in 1990, but couldn't figure out why he couldn't win.".
Indurain was worse than Lance. Just never got caught.
Very nice comparison: “with a hematocrit that flew over the Eiffel Tower.”
Not sure that I always agree with you. After watching that interview with Greg I came away with the same viewpoint as you have. Willy Voet's book "Breaking the Chain", published in 1998 gives context to everything that Greg says in the interview.
Lemond who himself tried every trick to get an advantage like the illegal helmet in the 89 TdF. Lemond, who finished like 150th each Giro, to then being fully ready for the TdF. The Lemond with allergies and bullets in his body beating blood doped (not illegal back then IIRC)Theunissen and Rooks... Well, I like Geg, but the story of his seems too good to be true. I follow cycling since 1978, seen, read, heard it all.
3rd in 85, 4th in 86, 39th in '89, not 150th.
@@GeorgeCrosley Upps, you forgot to mention the 105th, and the tons of DNFs in the Giro... If you think I did cherry picking, so you did... Fact remains: Lemond was the first who fully concentrated on the TdF, only the TdF. LA took this approach to the extreme.
@@FoxxyBrown1111 You said "each Giro," not "some Giros."
@@GeorgeCrosley You do your hair splitting contest, I do mine... Cheery picking back or forth, in general, Lemond was not good in Giro, nor in Vuelta, given him being an "all time great never doped but ofc had TUEs". Facts.
@@FoxxyBrown1111 Okay, so you had some facts and some lies. I had no lies. Congratulations.
This is disturbing. I want to believe in Lemond. He seems like a great guy with principles. I want to believe it was just iron injections that helped him in the final stage of the 1989 Giro d'Italia and that grit is how he became pro again after the hunting accident.
Just believe him. With his VO2Max he was doped naturally from the get go. Finished 3rd his very first year and was going to beat Hinault in 85. He was an absolute beast.
@@eddieguzman591 well blood transfusions have been around a very long time. The US Navy published a paper in 1947. But maybe he was sleeping at high altitude?
Yea, Greg was a physical freak. x2 on his V02 Max and heart stats. He was all legs, lungs, and heart. If he did cheat, he wouldn't be coming out against the cheaters. Who would want to put themselves under scrutiny like that unless they didn't cheat? Anyone who helped him cheat, after hearing him come out about it, would have spoke up, IMO. Greg's the genuine article.
@@Clint_the_Audio-Photo_Guy I hope you're right... 🤞
Only questionable thing ever documented about Lemond was the "iron supplements" his soigneur had injected him with for anemia in the '89 Giro. Then again, it's entirely possible that that's exactly what he was told.
So I guess according to Greg Lemond he was the only guy ever not doping on the pro level 🤷🏻♂️. Yawn, same Lemond complaining every since he was no longer in the Peleton.
so according to Lemond, Indurain was doped but he was clean. Very convincing. Its obvious everyone was and is doped and also obvious Miguel was better than lemond
Lemond is still so bitter that 90’ies are living rent free in his head - always out with an axe to grind on everybody associated with the sport.
Indurain never won a non-TT tour stage in his five victories. (He won over Lemond on the climb in 1990.) He simply crushed everybody in the TTs and followed wheels in the mountains. It's hard for me to put Indurain ahead of Lemond. Indurain was a TT specialist and a smart GC rider who was on a good team.
Believe me, you are 99.7% right on this one.
Greg LeMond was an exceptional talent, but I find it very hard to believe that he never took a doping product during his entire career. LeMond is what fictional narratives are made of; and if it wasn't for his quip about Armstrong back in the day, we wouldn't even be talking about this. I wish the guy the best and hope I'm wrong, but I still respect him either way. Guy was a powerhouse.
LeMond’s Paris Time Trial was at the same level of JV’s Sallanches one
@@cyclinghighlights The difference is JV admitted to doping; LeMond and his team have backed themselves into a corner where, for commercial and marketing reasons, there's no way he can come out and say, "Yeah, I took some amphetamine's back in the day, so what? It was a fundamental requirement."
@@matttilley8620stupid comment. First he won in 86 pre epo, second the TT in Paris was pancake flat and down wind with a clear aero advantage, IE the bars. Pedro Delgado with no aero bars finished within 2 minutes of him, hardly miraculous.
@@cyclinghighlightsutter codswallop. Do you have the power file?
@@richardhall4830 Richard: Pleasure to meet you. Your rude introduction aside, I appreciate what you're saying. I am familiar with everything you said Greg did, and I am certainly not an authority on Greg's or anyone else's proclivities, past or present. My opinion is simply based on what I've learned about what goes on in the peloton since day one. And by that I mean I cannot think of a single Tour winner other than Greg who has won Le Tour sans some form of pick-me-up. I'd like to ask him what he thinks of that comment. Like I said, Greg was an amazingly gifted cyclist whose life turned to crap when Pharmstrong came along. I have huge respect for the guy and am only expressing an opinion based on the history of the sport.
Everyone doped and Lemond was the cleanest on the planet
Lol
You need to look at Paris Nice... Matteo is 6 foot 3 inches whose weight is listed at 143lb (which can't be true) who kept up with one the best in the world, Remco in the mountains (Remco is 5 foot 7 inches 137lb). They are lying about Matteo's weight to justify his climbing.
Jorgensen is listed at 152 pounds on Pro Cycling Stats.
They tend to list the weights from very early on in their careers or even when they were espoirs. Just look at the weights listed for MvdP and Wout. There's no way in hell MvdP is much below 85kg nowadays, but he's listed as 75kg. Wout's not much lighter. The idea Remco weighs anywhere near 61kg now is laughable. It's been done almost since the dawn of time in cycling ... as the riders get bigger and stronger and more prominently muscled, listing lower weights fools enough people into thinking the W/Kg aren't *that* stratospheric (they are).
As the saying goes: "WHEN YOU POINT A FINGER AT SOMEONE, THERE ARE 3 MORE FINGERS POINTING BACK AT YOU."
LeMond is the Snoop Dogg of the cycling business: always immersed in doping allegations and/or investigations while oddly avoiding being included in one, or any police scrutiny for that matter. Sounds to me like he's The Snitch of the cycling business. Not that I am pro-doping mind you. I would not be surprised if, eventually, he's found to have cooperated with the police. He's known to frolic around the big three, visiting teams, talking to the team members, the organization, etc. OR that he was also found to have doped. I think Lance Armstrong learned the snitch side of cycling from him. We do remember what Lance did to Mayo when the later whooped his ass at the DL Mount Ventoux stage right? Bitch quickly ran to the UCI to let them know that he had heard from someone that Ivan was on EPO.
To me, an independent observer, it looks like LeMond had his own independent doctor at home prescribing him things. If my memory serves me right, LeMond used to "disappear" when getting ready for the big races. That's a red flag.
Maybe, but at least he speaks out against doping. I can't think of any other TDF winner who even comes close to LeMond in campaigning against doping.
@@steveeskenazi4128 That's a bit like Ted Bundy campaigning against serial killing.
It's a shame but pro cycling is as straight as pro wrestling. I used to watch the tour until the mid-1990s, when it was clear something was amiss. Professionals justify their activities by saying everyone else is doping, or, why should people use natural genetic advantages when I train as hard as they do. I feel sorry for the clean ones, great riders who see their careers last a year or two because they are not on the same page.
Greg fran from the statt. He brought aero bars. I still wean my Z kit on Zwift. Thanks for the memories
Greg's shortcomings are always someone else's fault.
Because they were. He didn't shoot himself, and he didn't dope, lol.
@@Clint_the_Audio-Photo_Guydo you really believe LeMond didn't dope at all? Never?
@@barriem5318 Yep.
@@Clint_the_Audio-Photo_Guy I hope we never find out differently. I'm a lemond fan too
@@barriem5318 Yea, he wouldn't be bringing it up at all if he did, IMO. Lance wasn't bringing up the subject, only defending when reporters would question him.
Lemond was clean. A big man like indurain winning in the mountains.....? Lemond was right.
Between 1991 and 1995 Induráin never win a mountain stage
@@cyclinghighlightsstupid comment he gifted many like both alpine stages in 1993, the one he gifted Claudio in 91, the one given Leblanc at Hautacam. Plus in 95 his exhibition on la plagne is the ultimate beast performance, just he'd let zulle get 6 minutes up the road.
@@richardhall4830put it whatever way you want but he only win TT'S.
@@cyclinghighlights But he did win in 1990 when he let Lemond pull him and then he blasted past him like it was nothing,. Only reason he didn't do better in that tour was the order to wait for his teammate. Come on, be better than that.
Lemond was far from clean but he is right about Indurain. Mercx pointed out that he probably could have won any mountain stage he wanted to but gifted them to others - thats how he bought the favors Armstrong didnt do which came back and haunted him.
No doubt LeMond would have won 4 or 5 Tours had he not got shot. Now I kinda find it hard to believe that LeMond was the only clean cyclist out of all those cats who won the Tour and have been doping before and after him, but maybe so. And if so, that's awesome. With that said, I've always have been a fan!
Most of your videos are about doped cyclists. I would love to see at least one, once in a while that was about clean cyclists. It would be very refreshing. Please.
Here are a lot of videos of Vingegaard for example
Find a clean pro cyclist then ....
Must be very hard to sound clever 30 + years later....king on Monday quarterbacks lol...Greg a true champion 🏁
I love Greg. But he wouldn´t have won 5 Tours - not after 1990 at least. Remember: In 1991 Charly Mottet - a notorious non-doper - finished more than 5 minutes ahead of him. LeMond was done after 1990 due to illness and not only due to doping.
PS: I´m sure LeMond would have won 5 Tours without his hunting accident though!
Hey was done. There were simply better athletes than he was used to competing against. I’m sorry but there is no way he could come close to competing against the likes of Pogi, Rogla and Jonas. Training improved, as did the actual conditioning of the athletes..
And Andy Hampsten, another 'clean' rider finished 4th in 1992.
Lemond was doped to the eyeballs himself. How else did he beat the who's who of elite cyclists that were themselves doped up, particularly in an event like the tour, where doping gives such a huge advantage.. EPO was out in Greg's day along with Testosterone, phet, cortisone and the rest. Claiming he was clean just isn't credible. I have no problem with it; I'm just pointing it out.
No evidence whatsoever. He was a winner all the way up the ranks. Had a huge VO2 max that was measured when he was young.
Yes it’s convenient that we have no access to his samples any more.
@@mitchhorton9178fantasy land
His huge Vo2 max is the unicorn myth Lemond want to peddle to his cult. Vo2 max does mean jack shit, some of the highest isnt even recorded by cyclists.
So every other team had access to EPO except LeMond's?
He told that French teams in 1991 no. But I think Castorama probably knowed a lot
EPO was available when Lemond was racing but people didn’t know how to use them for cheating. The Armstrong made a science of deafening the blood test
LaMond should have been doing the N.B.C. T.D.F. commentary instead of Armstrong.
Greg lost only 8 sec to Indurain in 91's 73KM TT (!!) being clean and destrying all other dopped top athletes - what a joke.
Greg has no shame blaming everyone in the same things he did like any other top top pro rider had to do
Exactly
Is there credible evidence of this?
There is no evidence at all of Lemond doping. He was always a winner coming up from a young age and didn’t turn great in one off season like the rest.
@@mitchhorton9178 I guess we should dream big & believe in miracles
He’s also an expert on Motor doping. Maybe there is a reason why he knows so much about it.
So he won the tour two more times for a total of three riding against Riders, who are supposedly doping. Sounds like sour grapes.
The grapes are very sour.
But he won pre-epo or at least before it had been perfected
Indurain was too big. As soon as he started climbing with real climbers...that was an obvious EPO indicator. Its not incredulous that Lemond didnt personally encounter doping in his team - since most doping was occurring outside of direct team management involvement. The manager may insinuate, but the riders were doing it privately. I dont think team - level doping programs really started until the mid 90's .
I think Indurain has stated in interviews that the victory he's most proud of is the Clasica de San Sebastian (1990), which is of course a one-day race. It says a lot, really. He was always very strong on the flats, but as you say, too big to be a stage race winner with serious climbing.
On the other hand, he was always racing smart, never overclocking it on the climbs, reserving the extraterrestial performances for the chrono days. You'd watch the big stages in the mountains, it was so weird watching riders getting dropped while he was just sitting there setting the pace. And he never bullied other riders like Armstrong did, in more than one occasion. I think Indurain's low public profile and his obvious good standing in the 90's peloton is the real reason why it's unlikely he'll ever be outed like others did.
@@AG-el6vt: Doped or not, Indurain was a freak to watch. Still surreal to see that huge frame hauling himself seated over cols and riding 30 kg lighter dudes out of the way.
Riis had to nearly kill himself to compete with that.
Very nice reference to Tapie, I have to say
So how were the supposedly 'clean' Charly Mottet and Andy Hampsten able to finish 4th in the 1991 and 1992 Tours respectively?
The average speed of the 1991 Giro had been nothing special. Only the 5th fastest that far.
1991 Tour had been marginally faster (0.12 km/h) than 1990 (when Lemond was over 9 minutes behind Chiappucci after the 10th stage, all regained in two "miraculous" mountain stages) and slower than 1988.
Can you magically come back from a shotgun accident "clean" surrounded by bunch of junkies? 🤔🤫🤑
I don't think Lemond considered amphetamines as doping. He roomed for awhile with Fignon, who admitted to heavy and prolonged amphetamine use. So, whether Lemond used speed or not, he had to know its use had always been rampant in cycling.
Fignon didn't admit to prolonged amphetamine use, he admitted to taking it for training. Even then it was easily detectable and not used in races with dope tests.
"They were all clean!" 😭💀
0:54 that guy crouching behind looks suspicious!
Always nice to see Greg calling out everyone else in cycling for doping. Apparently he was the only cyclist not doing it if you believe his stories.
Every winner has doped. End of.
Mathieu not, Wout not,
Haha
@@3pan1 keep dreaming
Lemond never dope he never had to
Sometimes back in the days someone had to be clean, due to no doping available
Now they are doing mechanical doping.
You mean hiden electro motors?
@@nusreterzurumlu8772 Yes hidden power source and motors. Apparently in 2016 some Triathalete got caught with one. I am not aware of anyone in the pro pelton of road racing getting caught with one. But every time any one has a "unbelievable" performance, all of the paranoids start calling out either doping or mechanical doping. Cycling is like the boy who cried wolf, no one will ever believe them again, all generations of new cyclists from here on out will be considered cheaters because of the past, pretty sad. I say just enjoy the sport, the racing is awesome. If you can't live with the fact someone may or may not be cheating, stop watching.
The narrator is sharing a perspective that I can’t figure. Please comment.
What perspective?
They all dope, they have dopes since the 80s. Now it’s even worse. I know, I use it myself!
Someone is jealous of Greg Lemond …😂
Hinault and Lemond were fighting like cats and dogs at La Vie Claire. Only one side got the good stuff from owner Tapie. It wasn't the boys from North America.
And in Renault 1984 only Fignon right?
Yeah, just like Ben Johnson was the cheating dope and good old Carl Lewis never touched the stuff??
Nah, I dont think Greg took EPO but i believe at times his memory may fail him
Hilarious levels of delusion
The "chanteur" Bernard Tapie, hahaha
EPO was in clinical trials in California from 1983 and on when Clean Greg went from #48 to #6 in the world and it had been released for general use by 1988 when Greg had magic "iron shots" during the Giro to deal with anemia. It is funny how much Greg LeMond knows about doping with EPO, while he is the most likely rider to come in contact with it when it was not generally available, and it is quite certain that with his hunting accident he would have been administered EPO in the hospital.
EPO was not outlawed until the late 1990'ties and you could not test for it till 2002.
The lies that LeMond tells about himself are really tall, like anyone that ever beat him was cheating and on EPO, yet he set a time trial record that no doper in 35 years on better equipment and with better training as ever matched, and all because he had a VO2max of 92.5 (Jonas Vingegaard had VO2 Max of 97.0 before being scouted by Visma)
Bear in mind that it is very difficult to win a Tour without a team effort. In the 90s many feats were achieved by a single rider exhibiting a superhuman effort ... not believable... so I gave up watching cycling 😞
Anyone can shout anything, but in the end it is the first wheel that hits the finish line what counts.
It's a delicate balance to claim the oxygen vector drugs are ethically worse than things like amphetamines and testosterone, which have less clear performance advantages. I don't know what LeMond may have used in his career, but it clearly wasn't EPO. But EPO was the game changer. It's what eliminated altitude as a factor, depriving riders from Colombia and Colorado their previous advantage in the hills. The massive focus today on altitude training shows that things aren't the same as they were in the 90's and 00's, when you got your altitude training via injection. Is there cheating today? It's likely, but it's not the same as it was then. The focus today is much more on training and nutrition and aerodynamics.
Lemond has been proven right way too many times now to question his assertions.
So all LeMond could say in the future is always the truth?
@@cyclinghighlights That is the default until proven otherwise from now on. Yes.
Hope he gives the next lottery number then!
@@cyclinghighlights Not even close to the same thing.
The painful thing about speculating about doping in cycling is that the only people who know for sure are the cyclists themselves. What makes it worse is that people will not believe them even if they say the truth, especially if the truth is different from what people expect. It's sad really. At some point, the only cyclists one may take a chance on as being clean are the domestiques whose performances pale significantly compared to their team leaders.
Please, someone should invent time travel just so we can go back to observe what really happened (even if we can't necessarily change the past). It would feel good to know for sure rather than armchair speculation.
Was never a lemond fan..ever
Okay
Of all the doping scandals the 80's era East German Women's Olympians -- they were pumped up with so much testosterone and other things that they pretty much all became men.
6'2" indurain hanging in the alps. never sat well with me.
Gregs the GOAT no one could live with prime Lemond
Cycling and doping, two words that are and always will be in perfect harmony. What’s available from your local chemist and GP is enough to get you started. Those that know, know. Those that don’t or think that top athletes don’t juice, unfortunately I have no words for them. Read about Franz Beckenbauer, your starter for 10.
It must be! It's the only explanation.