We may finally get more visibility into the legal battle.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1244596343...eTabs%3Darticle

The Trek lawsuit, which was filed in the spring of last year, is essentially a contract dispute, but has been largely overshadowed by the feud. In court filings, Mr. LeMond levels some explosive charges, alleging that Mr. Armstrong paid off cycling officials to avoid positive drug tests and worked with a doctor known for his blood-doping expertise.

I am sure that those with vested interests will find lots to comment on here.

Dave.

LeMond is an absolute diamond. I don't know how much longer he can avoid a padded room, but I for one hope it's a longgggg time. He cracks me up ...

Poor Lance. It's not like he can't return fire (François Bellocq), but nobody can outclass Greg nowadays when it comes to outrageous accusations. That's what I admire about Greg ... he never let's the truth get in the way of a good story ...

The picture of Greg's arm around LA at the tour in 99 is strange. Didn't he call his victory the biggest come back in the history of sports or the biggest fraud, at that same time?

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P...90609163831.jpg

I also did not know that Greg showed up to crash the press conference with LA and Catlin, strange behavior and there is no point to it.

Putting LA aside for a moment, Greg is a little off his rocker and I am sorry to see that.

I miss the Combinè jersey...

i'm sure posting anti-lemond comments on cycling forums was part of that strategy.

likeArrowHeadrider, if you don't know the chronology of events, perhaps you shouldn't be so quick to judgment.



i couldn't agree with you more, steve. i'd love to get my hands on one too, anyone still make them?

The chronology of events is not important to my thinking that Gred IMO is off his rocker. He has an obsession. This whole thing would make a great Telenovela style show. Maybe this is where they get their script ideas from.

I agree it's sad about Greg (or was it Greg's sad ? .. no matter). The trouble with Greg is that he cares too much. Whereas most ex-dopers move on and publish books about their exploits, Greg has carved a niche for himself as cleaner than clean and he's put himself in a difficult position ... one which he clearly can't cope with. In Greg's defense, I would say that at the time, he didn't realise that he was doping. It was the realisation after the event which was so cruel.

Greg's a victim and is now paying the price. Seems to be a recurring theme in his life (allegedly)

Are you predicting a complete mental meltdown for Lance when he, gasp, realizes that all of that training advice that he has been getting from Ferrari actually was doping products?

Poor guy is going to get himself committed.

Dave.

Yeah, right after hell freezes over. Lance and Greg ? Different animals.

Greg Lemond, thank god for the guy. The only American GT winner other than Hampsten with a shred of honesty, decency, and integrity. Oh, that and needlemark-less arms, too.

You must have been on a Himalaya trecking tour that you missed that "crash".
It confirms my idea that the majority of Lance`s defenders are just people who are not well informed.

Or, deliberate willfull ignorance.

Dave.

Not letting oneself get smeared, not taking lightly the fact that his business was destroyed because he spoke up as an anti-doping advocate and doing so through legal means says he's obsessed? Oh yeah. Shut-up Greg! Let yourself be a doormat - what's wrong with you that you won't?!

Those of you who are the staunchest fans of lance still have not yet explained all the descrepancies in his story. Just how do you explain it? Oh, you can't. I'm a bitc*, Greg's obsessed, Frankie's jealous.....good good argument. On to the facts please. I've asked 2 years ago to explain descrepancies and not once have any of you anti-Betsy people done so. You stick with the name-calling.

Oh, but there was a point. I'm sure you've heard that the guilty are always drawn back to the scene of their crime ?

Why do you think Greg circles the light of the anti-doping world like a demented moth ? He is powerless to resist.

For one, I am no LA supporter, I do see some good in his career and things that he has done outside of cycling. Where others think that he is nothing short of Lucifer's son and may even have "666" on his scalp. Hey, maybe that is what the French were after, confirmation.

I missed the crashing with Catlin and what does it matter, I would have thought it was lame then too. Greg may have some points, but he comes across as a complete whiner and hung up on LA.

your joking right? deliberate, willful ignorance because he didn't know that lemond was at the press conference?

Look I respect what you say and believe your side of events 100%. I just am not also 100% convinced that Greg was 100% clean when he rode. It seems from a spectators view that he is consumed with LA, and at the end of the day his bike sales short fall is his responsibility and he needs to own that.

LakeArrowhead may have missed the conference, or the reference to it. Though it had plenty of splash on here and elsewhere.

But, the comment was more generally directed and actually not meant for Lake Arrowhead at all.


Mirror, mirror on the wall?

Or, was it something about the glass house?

Dave.

Nobody's trying to treat LaMond like a doormat. In fact, if he could keep his nose out of other people's business, nobody would show any interest in him.


Two years and nobody can explain the discrepancies that you see ? ... well, maybe there's nothing to explain. A lot of people here seem to have a soft spot for you. Maybe they just don't want to say they can't see the discrepancies.

Anti-Betsy ? I've got an Aunty Mary if that helps ? Maybe not.

I'm afraid "anti-Betsy" opened a whole can of worms for me. Pro-Lance = anti-Betsy ? Let's not go there.

Exactly. Not it`s not only about Lance`s defenders. If I look at other cases it`s the same. For example the Floyd case. The major part of his loyal defenders were people who had only superficial knowledge about Cycling. People who didn`t have much knowledge about the doping things. Tom Fine or Judge Hue - really painful to see that kind of naivity.
Or our forum-clown Ali. Writes about the Vrijman-report and obviously did not follow Cycling when the report was published in 06. Ignorance - willful or not - certainly is a major root of the doping apology problem.

Okay Ali, you show me one person who believes lance who believes me.

No descrepancies? There are too too many on his part. I'm not rehashing. You know what they are as they've been discussed ad naseum here. I must say, Your first two sentences are quite funny.

You hit the nail on the head there !

If you doping conspiracists would wise up, we doping apologists would have a lot less work to do.

(sigh ! an apologist's work is never done)

maybe landis hired the same Public Strategies Inc. to do the smear campaign. a lot of the battle for public opinion is done on sites like this. it would not surprise me one bit that some of the posters here were/are hired guns.

armstong knows that he has to simply keep "america" believing -- that's why he chose larry king to answer the epo charges...

larry king!?

Me ? (with qualifications on both sides).

In general, I believe Lance simply because the body of anti-doping evidence is against him doping to win 7 consecutive TdFs and never, ever testing positive for anything ... apart from bum cream.

I believe that you aren't a liar, so I believe in you, but ... I believe you're mistaken.

Just my opinion.

Mr. LeMond looked "like somebody had walked up and slapped him."

lance...eeeevil enough to keep the pimp hand strong over a 2-bar cell phone connection!

"I wish they'd all kiss and make up," says Mr. Mount, one of the pioneers of professional cycling in the U.S., who says he isn't in contact with Mr. LeMond or Mr. Armstrong and considers himself an impartial observer.

'smiling george', ever the great cyclist...montreal, 1976 wasn't it? in the rain...up the mont tremblant?

Mr. LeMond levels some explosive charges, alleging that Mr. Armstrong paid off cycling officials to avoid positive drug tests

brilliant legal plan!!! you'll have as much success proving that as the dpf brigade does. let us know how that goes, willya?

Mr. LeMond declined to comment for this article.

i figure he's going to 'decline' a lot in the courtroom. complete mental breakdown? off tangent harangues?

greg's life is in tattered pieces, his reputation self-mutilated...his scatter-brained 'speeches' not even able to complete a coherent thought anymore. i feel for the guy, but he brought it upon himself.

I actually laughed !

That's the second time in twenty years ... must be getting soft.

Eh, I believe LeMond. Look how Lance bullies the small fry who cross him. He wants to crush Cunego now, apparently. (What, did Cunego threaten his kids or something? Why the aggressive reaction?)

LeMond is not small fry. And he can't be bullied. Lance is fighting someone just as tenacious as he is. That must really chap Lance's a$$.

Here is the complete exchange:

============
>QUOTE(zarathustra @ Jun 11 2009, 01:36 PM)
>
>You must have been on a Himalaya trecking tour that you missed that "crash".
>It confirms my idea that the majority of Lance`s defenders are just people who are not well informed.

Or, deliberate willfull ignorance.

Dave.
=============

I will not accuse you of "...deliberate willful ignorance.", so I suppose you were "...not well informed." in chosing to respond to Dave.

Laurent Fignon is gravely ill and admitted to his doctors he doped with cortisone and amphetamines. And I am assuming he meant a lot not once or twice since it had health implications.
Another cancer death bed confession about doping from a cyclist eh?
he he

So, for all the haters who have like a million times trotted out this argument to "prove" Lance doped becasue he beat Ullrich and Basso who were doped, I now have the pleasure of presenting to you, courtesy of your own mantra-"he who beats dopers must be a doper":

St. Greg beat Fignon, a confessed doper, so he must have doped too and is a liar a cheat and a fraud.

How do you like them apples?

I think it's possible to ride clean and beat somebody on cortisone & speed (especially just by 8 seconds). EPO use is a whole 'nother ball game. EPO, testosterone, insulin, & HGH use is practically a whole 'nother sport.

Edited for sarcasm: So is the ASO going to make Fignon give back his yellow jerseys?

So by your circular logic Armstrong is a doper, glad you finally came to your senses.

yes stever, i was a bit slow on the uptake. but you'll notice that i didn't immediately fly off the handle and insult him. i asked if he was joking, he informed me of his intent, and our exchange was conducted in a civil manner. i think it's a shame that matters on this forum aren't handled that way more often. (and no, i'm not speaking about your response to me.)

I think it's possible to ride clean and beat somebody on cortisone & speed (especially just by 8 seconds).

we all know saint greg did it by superior equipment and a fierce devotion to his wife. and he spoke french. and he didn't used to be a prick.

the boone aero-bars counter-acted the methamphetamines and the styrofoam lid more than made up for the cortisone...the same stuff folks tell me rocketed floyd, da debil's own mennonite kid, landis up multiple climbs and away from a pack of epo-doped thugs that were vainly chasing him.

right?

right.

the logic...it's...it's...downright illogical.

oh, and the win was by 8 seconds, but the total time deficit made up was...what?...around 50 seconds (PRECISELY the time fignon's ponytail and cowhorn bars lost him in comparison to saint greg's high-tech rig) total on the itt stage.

Cortisone, Testosterone, absolutely. No way those guys were doing speed in Tour in the late 80's way to easy to test for and you could end up like Tom Simpson

if fignon said he did speed, i'm guessing he did it.

t, cortisone, cortico-steroids, meth...i got to wonder if they masked for them, knew how to bogey the tests, the schedules? yeah, they got popped at testing...sometimes, just like today i would guess.

but you could be right about no speed during the tt. i wonder if fignon even went to controls after his finish? given a pass because he was so distraught? it's probably impossible to dig up test records online from back then.

the point hombre was making was that he was an admitted doper using both go-faster and recovery agents to boost his performance...and to be clear, i don't really have a problem with that. fignon was never one of my favorite french riders, but i did like bernie hinault, charlie mottet and terry marrie.

well if we needed an example of "willful ignorance"...thank you, hombre.

lemond in answering a recent question said that had he been on epo in 1989 he would have won the tour by 30 minutes.

i'm sure he would say the same about fignon.

epo (and blood doping) is a game changer.

armstrong, according to hombre, destoyed a whole bunch of top pros who all had that 30 minutes advantage on him. amazing.

So do think EPO was not around in the late 80's? Because it was alive and well in the peleton. So Greg should have been beat by 30 minutes by someone using EPO right?

Mistaken - elaborate.
Just two examples of someone else clearly not mistaken just didn't get the stories straight:
1. Tim Herman or Lance (lance testified no doctors ever present for the infamous hospital incident. Tim Herman said I misunderstood the doctors in that infamous hospital incident.)

2. Stephanie on tape (hospital incident where lance admitted to having doped) it happened. Stephanie testified people from the hospital came in the room (she just got amnesia when they started talking.) James Startt testifies Sephanie confirmed it with him.

So humor me and explain how I'm mistaken.

But so kind of you to believe in me, in my honesty.

you don't know about the catlin showdown, nor about the timeline of lemond's realization that armstrong was doping and yet you know this.

are you one of the paid PR people that armstrong hired to defame lemond?

freakin' hysterical and pathetic.

i'm not even taking the bait as this has been discussed ad nauseum and a timeline agreed upon by those of us who are reality-based.
omg

Hyperbole is fun to spew, but it's a weak rebuttal. Landis is irrelevant. Logic isn't the issue here either. The issue is can a clean rider beat someone doped on cortisone & speed. I think so. Having been on oral cortisone once for medical reasons, I question how useful it would be in the TdF. As an anti-inflammatory, I believe it would take the edge off of any aches & pains, so it could give a user an advantage. But it's no panacea. If the riders are injecting it into joints to ease pain, it would help a lot, but I'm not sure that's how they are using it. Oral cortisone can make you jumpy & makes it hard to sleep well. As for amphetamines, well, I'm not pure as the driven snow, and tried some in college for all nighters. Hated it. They just keep you going even though you're tired. But that's not the same as making you feel rested and energetic. From my experience, I'd think someone who'd been on cortisone & speed for 3 weeks would be raggedy, tired, and unable to rest. And therefore beatable.

The second issue is can a clean rider beat someone on EPO. I don't think so. It has a more powerful recovery effect than cortisone and probably reduces the need for sleep inhibiting amphetamines. Haven't tried EPO myself. But I believe it was Jorg Jaksche who said taking it was like receiving the fountain of youth. You feel as if you've gotten good rest. You're completely recovered and ready for the next stage.

So back to Hombre's original contention, I disagree with him and think it's very possible that a clean LeMond could have beaten a doped Fignon. But in the modern era of EPO, a clean Armstrong couldn't have beaten a doped Ullrich, Beloki, Vinokourov, Kloden, et al., in my humble, un-hyperboled opinion.

Link? Evidence? anything to support this statement or did you just invent this?

Ok, there are resources everywhere if you look.

EPO first made synthetically in 1983.

More than dozen European elite cyclists died in the 80's from it.

As we know the drug practices are not usually one guy, but many in the peloton. I am not saying it was the main “staple” of the peloton, but it was available and surely some of the elite guys must have been using it. One of those guys would have beat Greg by 30 minutes, after all it is a game changer.

There was a book I read in college that talked about the deaths in cycling and the general use of EPO in cycling in the 80's. I was in School from 1986-1990. I am trying to remember the name and will find it.

Here is one of many:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/ExerciseFitness/1607

"First introduced into the world of cycling in the late 1980s, EPO gained notoriety in a much-publicized scandal during the 1998 Tour de France. Beginning with EPO and other doping drugs discovered by border police in the car of a masseuse for one of the cycling teams, the scandal progressed to riders being detained and questioned, with several admitting to taking doping drugs. "

I think GL is just as phony as the guys he points fingers at. I don't see how he could not have doped at ALL during his career.

It's not my contention at all, as I know I was clear enough to say.

It was simply my turning around the continual rebuttals of folks here who use that argument to support their theories that Lance had to have doped ipso facto because Ullrich and Basso did.

Funny, no one seems to have gotten that point, that I was being ironic.
But why does that not surprise us?

Lets see if I can make this clear:

Fignon is a confessed doper.
Amphetamines and Coritsol are profound performance enhancers, particularly with amphetamine in intense efforts like the last ITT in Paris.
Think about him falling off his bike again at the end?
Like Tom Simpson?


Makes you re-visit these things with a different perspective huh?

Anybody got a popcorn eating emoticon?

Or one of somebody sitting on the toilet reading this on a laptop?

Nice....

And you claim to be a physician?

Hi Betsey,

Try not to get sucked into the black hole created by Pharmstrong and his delusional fan club. The truth will come out!

No, actually, it doesn't. Fignon collapsed crying because he knew he'd lost the Tour before he'd crossed the line--it was up on the timer. He sat on the street and couldn't get up because was so upset. He said before the stage that there was no way Lemond could make up that amount of time and he was confident he had the race won (so no clip-on bars, and the long ponytail). I realize you're being facetious, but you're kind of kicking someone when he's down, and it's not really funny.

Hmmm...

OP was so... 2006?

But,
Year that Swart claims Armstrong doped with him was so... 1995
Hospital confession was so... 1996
Cortisone positive and after-the-fact prescription was so... 1999
Actovegin and syringes were so... 2000
Carmichael settling with Strock and Kaiter was so... 2000/2001
"Dr Ferrari prescribed EPO" was so... 2002
Anderson claimed that he discovered a box of Andro was so... 2004
Emma O'Reilly admitting disposing of syringes was so... 2004
LA Confidential was so... 2004
Six positives, and The Armstrong Lie, were so... 2005
SCA Hearing was so... 2006
Ashenden testifying that Armstrong's levels were consistent with a series of injections during the Tour was so... 2006

Ah, now I see where you are going here.

Of course, it was hard to believe that Basso and Ullrich could not have been doping.

After all, the guy that they were racing against was running on everything except anti-freeze.

Sure makes you re-visit these things with a different perspective huh?

Dave.

surftel, don't bother. likearrowheadrider is simply rehashing the same unsubstantiated (il)logic that has been discredited on these forums. all he/she has to do is look through some pretty recent threads. but he/she won't because knowledge is not something that he/she is after.

make your arguments, that's the purpose of the forums. but your expression of glee in this matter is sickening.

cancer isn't funny.