Greg LeMond accuses Armstrong of doping

[RichK]

Yahoo Sports story (http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news?slug=reu-armstronglemond&prov=reuters&type=lgns)

Armstrong disappointed by LeMond accusations



PARIS, July 15 (Reuters) - Lance Armstrong expressed his disappointment on Thursday after he was once again accused of taking banned substances by triple Tour de France winner Greg LeMond.

"Greg LeMond was my idol as I grew up in cycling because he was a great champion and did great things on the bike," said Armstrong, who is aiming for a record sixth title in the world's premier cycling race.

"Many of his performances were so incredible especially his remarkable return to form and win at the '89 Tour.


"I'm disappointed and dismayed that for the past four years Greg has continued to question my performances and character."

LeMond, who suffered a hunting accident in 1987 but came back to win the Tour in 1989, insinuated that his fellow American Armstrong had been guilty of doping in an interview with French daily Le Monde.

"What I'm saying is that I want to see the truth when I watch the Tour," LeMond said. "Lance is ready to do anything to protect his secret but I don't know how he will manage to keep on convincing everybody he is innocent."

LeMond said cycling had changed drastically since he won the Tour in 1986, 1989 and 1990.

"Drugs are now so powerful that they can change a man physiologically. One could even convert a mule into a stallion," he said.

Asked about Armstrong's comeback after he recovered from cancer, LeMond answered: "There are no miracles in cycling, only explanations.

"After I suffered a hunting accident in 1987 it took me two years before I could race again and I never reached the same level."

(Additional reporting by Francois Thomazeau)

----------------------

Accusations without proof. LeMond's legacy just took a massive hit in my eyes.

I just don't see Lance taking drugs and submitting his post-cancer health to that kind of danger. Either way, nobody has proven anything.

[RacinM3]

I don't get this comment:


"After I suffered a hunting accident in 1987 it took me two years before I could race again and I never reached the same level."

Yet he won twice as many tours post-accident than he did pre-accident? :confused: Sounds like he reached a level above, to me. I'd like to see that quote in context.

[RichK]

I believe he also developed exercise induced asthma and/or allergies after his hunting accident.

I agree, seems way out of context.

[Insomniac]

I don't get this comment:



Yet he won twice as many tours post-accident than he did pre-accident? :confused: Sounds like he reached a level above, to me. I'd like to see that quote in context.

It seems like he is saying a couple things. He knows he wasn't at the same level he was at before the accident (but still high enough to win). And, that Lance never won before he had cancer, and following it, he has won 5 in a row. He is questioning how Lance came back stronger than before because he knows he himself didn't come back as strong.

[Methanolandbrats]

Greg sounds like a jealous, whiney lil' bitch. Maybe he should compare his "comeback" training log to Lance's.

[Joe in LA]

I'm dismayed that LeMond would make the accusations unless he actually was aware of the doping. It is very hard to prove a negative, which is what everyone is asking Armstrong to do.

[RobGuru]

Me thinks Lemond burned himself out a bit trying to keep pace with Bernard Hinault, who kicked Lemonds arse before he decided to let Lemond win.

I agree with the jealousy theory. Lemond is no longer the USA's best international cyclist. That title goes to LA, as it should.

[RacinM3]

Lance never won before he had cancer, and following it, he has won 5 in a row. He is questioning how Lance came back stronger than before because he knows he himself didn't come back as strong.

I guess, but that's like me saying you can't be good at my job because I suck at it, therefore you can't be any good. Makes about as much sense, too.

Maybe Lance would be working on #7 or #8 now if he hadn't beaten cancer. Better yet, if he hadn't had cancer at all, maybe he wouldn't have even gotten one win.

Making assumptions about others based solely on your own experience is folly.

[FTG]

Guess what happened when some of Americans top athletes couldn't get their roids from Balco anymore? They all lost.

Everyone else on the tour de France is doping. The only way you can win is if your doping too.

The reason Lemond is so sure Armstrong is doping is because Lemond was doping too.

[Chaos]

It has come to the point that every elite athlete will be questioned and will be perceived to be drugged when they are that much better than the competition.

I have to admit i am a little weary about armstrong, only because I have seen what cancer can do to people. Granted, i don't know the complete story of his cancer, his treatments, or his training at the time, so I'm not going to assume he's juiced up.

[cartcanuck]

I'll admit that I don't believe that Armstrong is totally clean. He's demonstrated low morality in other areas of his life (leaving his wife and kids for Cheryl Crow for example....a wife that stuck through him through his cancer and his comeback I might add), so it's not impossible to think that he might try to push the limits when it comes to doping of some sort. As people have said, it's so competitive these days winning as consistently has he has without some "help" is unlikely. I have no question that he has an incredible drive and motivation, that he is incredibly focused, and that he trains like crazy. But I also believe that moral flaws extend into almost every area of your life. I respect his abilities because whether he's juicing or not, you still don't win this many tour's without natural ability and all the hard work. But I'm very skeptical of his "character" and fully expect that some day, maybe after he retires, that the truth will come out.

[Railbird]

You're questioning a guys morals because he split from his wife?

Here's a little story

My first wife had a serious bought with cancer and I stuck with her through the recovery. Lots of tears and time spent bedside not to mention the cash factor. When she fully recovered she showed me the door.

Low morals?

Nope, she wanted to go looking for a millionaire, found one too.

Any personal relationship story has more sides to it than a round bar.

Lemond is a whiney puke who can't stand being over shadowed imo.

[cartcanuck]

That sucks 'bird!!! :mad: Big time.

And I'd never question you're morals, you showed your high morals by sticking by your wife when she was sick.

But whether your wife wanted a millionaire and your weren't one, or Armstrong decided that he wanted a superstar for arm candy, they are both wrong....morally and ethically. And you and Armstrong's wife get left behind because of it (hmmm, there's a pairing for ya! ;) ).

Seriously, anyone who walks out on a family who have been strong and supportive deserves to be questioned. In Armstrong's case I think he fell in love with the popularity and press and superstardom. That's a weakness.

I agree, Lemond is pouting. He's likely bitter because he's now a footnote to Armstrong's record book. But I still wouldn't be surprised to find out that Armstrong been a bad boy with the needle.

[ilferrari]

You're questioning a guys morals because he split from his wife?

Here's a little story

My first wife had a serious bought with cancer and I stuck with her through the recovery. Lots of tears and time spent bedside not to mention the cash factor. When she fully recovered she showed me the door.

Low morals?

Nope, she wanted to go looking for a millionaire, found one too.

Sounds like low morals to me. :confused:

Anyone who wins that often gets sneered at by people who are jealous. Even in F1, where Schumacher has been accused of cheating countless times. Play an online game well and you're a hacker. It's natural human stuff. Lemond should just shutup unless he has inside knowledge.

[Ankf00]

haha, Armstrong's no saint by a long shot dudes, and comes off overly arrogant quite often whenever he's in Austin

that said, go Lance, kick some arse.

[IlliniRacer]

I'll admit that I don't believe that Armstrong is totally clean. He's demonstrated low morality in other areas of his life (leaving his wife and kids for Cheryl Crow for example....a wife that stuck through him through his cancer and his comeback I might add), so it's not impossible to think that he might try to push the limits when it comes to doping of some sort. As people have said, it's so competitive these days winning as consistently has he has without some "help" is unlikely. I have no question that he has an incredible drive and motivation, that he is incredibly focused, and that he trains like crazy. But I also believe that moral flaws extend into almost every area of your life. I respect his abilities because whether he's juicing or not, you still don't win this many tour's without natural ability and all the hard work. But I'm very skeptical of his "character" and fully expect that some day, maybe after he retires, that the truth will come out.

Just a little FYI: He met his ex-wife AFTER his battle with cancer. She was working for a PR firm that was working with the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

[RacinM3]

He met his ex-wife AFTER his battle with cancer. She was working for a PR firm that was working with the Lance Armstrong Foundation.

Really? Well, then, that would change it completely.