Ethics, doping and the future of cycling video

The panel discussion at Santa Clara University to which Greg LeMond participated on February 17th can be watched on Fora.tv.

It's about 1 hour long, and nothing really new is discussed, but it's still really worth the hour. Greg looks in great shape, and as usual, sounds passionate about cycling and eager to see it becoming clean. It also appears that Greg gets online and is well aware of what's being said about him on the internet. I'll put transcripts of some of his quotes in future posts.

I'm also embedding the video here. Enjoy!

Happy New Year to all Greg LeMond fans!

and to everybody else too ;-)... (I know, I know... a bit late, but better late than ever)


And to start the year, two little news about Greg:

There's a short extract of the Procycling issue dedicated to him here:
Procycling talks to Greg LeMond.

And the panel about "Legal Issues in Drug Testing Athletes", held by the Chicago Bar Association last November and to which Greg participated, was aired on CSPAN, and they now have a PodCast of it.

Go to this CSPAN site and subscribe to the Outside the Beltway podcast, or use directly the following xml:
http://download.rbn.com/cspan/cspan/download/beltway_feed.xml,

and get the January, 2nd 2008 episode... Greg is introduced at about 1'16''05, then makes a little presentation about his career, talks about his retirement with 'a bad taste in his mouth', talks about doping... And in the end, with the rest of the panel, answers a few Q&A.

If you want it and have trouble getting it, contact me: lemondAB@gmail.com, changing AB by the 2 last digits of Greg's birth year ... (sorry 'bout that, just my loose attempt at trying to avoid spams).

Anti-Doping panel

Greg LeMond was participating in a panel discussion about doping last Tuesday in Chicago, hosted by the Chicago Bar Association.

A report on that panel can be found in Cyclingnews, along with a few pictures.

Here are a few quotes from Greg:

Greg Lemond began his speech by talking about how he entered the sport and then the basics of cycling's history of doping, paying particular attention to the final years of his career. "One of our team-mates left our team to an Italian team, saying 'This [doping] is what they are doing - you either provide the same thing or I am leaving.' The coach we had at the time refused and I still respect him to this day," explained Lemond. "That rider saw us before the Tour that year and just laughed at us, saying we had no chance. He said he had ridden the Tour of Spain and didn't feel his legs, not because he was in great shape, but because he had been doping."

"I lasted six days in that Tour de France that year, and that guy died of a heart attack seven months later," added Lemond. "That is when I retired from cycling."

"Most Americans think I am outspoken about this because of Lance Armstrong's success, or Floyd Landis," continued Lemond. "Unfortunately the only time most people have read what I have said about anti-doping in the sport has only been during those years."

Lemond said he is beginning to see the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel for cycling, in regards to the doping scandals. "Finally we have a sport that wants to change, now that there has been an economic impact. So I am more optimistic than I have been in many years. I spoke with the Tour de France director this year and I think for they first time the organizers want this to change - they need this to change, because it is crumbling underneath their feet. But it is going to be a slow process."

In regards to what Thompson said about the lack of fairness inherent in the current system, Lemond disagreed. "I want fairness - I don't want a an athlete to be falsely accused," he outlined. "But within the sport of cycling I don't know of one false positive that was not, years later, that it was positive. Unlike the defense attorneys, I think the process is skewed [in favor of] the athletes. The governing bodies have to live to a higher standard than even our criminal justice system. The criminal lab's standards are so low relative to scientific labs. And circumstantial evidence still does matter."

In short, Lemond reiterated his stance on anti-doping to an audience not made-up of cycling enthusiasts, putting it this way. "I see these athletes like Floyd Landis and Tyler Hamilton - they're not bad people, but they get in a situation where the tests aren't reliable or not testing and they feel that they have to keep up and compete."

It's not the first time that Greg LeMond is mentioning Philippe Casado dying a few months after leaving Gan. This experience seems to be quite at the heart of his anti-doping fight. I hope that Roger Legeay, the coach he is mentioning, has stayed 'incorruptible' all along.

I'm kinda glad to see Greg pointing out himself that it's a pity that so many people think he started speaking up against doping only since Armstrong won more than 3 Tours. I wrote a letter to Cyclingnews a bit ago about that, and I was mentioning in that letter an interview he did to "Le cyclisme international" in 1993 or 1994. He was already talking about Ferrari there. I tried to get back my hands on that issue, but didn't find it yet (too many movings in my life... ). It had Greg on the cover, in a Gan team jersey crossing his arms. If anyone has a scan of that, don't hesitate to share it somewhere!

I'm quite fed up with reading so often that he should have spoken out before, that it shows he is just jealous, while he did speak up! I'd like that there exists somewhere on the internet a real physical proof to refer to, showing that he did...

Mr Clean

For any fan of Greg LeMond, I highly recommend reading this piece by Benjamin Strong: Mr CLEAN: Greg LeMond and Pro Cycling's doping problems.
(And for non-fans, maybe a few things to learn... )

It relates in very well put words the atypical position of Greg against doping throughout his career and recently.

It includes some quite rare pictures, including this one, of Greg at age 16, winning one of his first European races in Belgium. That's one wonderful picture in my opinion, so vintage, looking like it could come directly from the 40's... so contrasting with later pictures in Greg's career.

The piece finishes with:

In more ways than one, Greg LeMond has courageously defied the social convention of keeping quiet about anything shameful. Although the record books tell a different story, the Tour de France has had no worthier champion than him.

Who does actually blast the image of sport?

In the last post I made a link to the article in the Denver Post untitled: LeMond blasts image of sport.

I know journalists are just looking for sensational titles sometimes, but that one is really quite annoying. Greg speaks out against doping, and fact is, doping exists in cycling, big time... Up to a nauseating level. Should it be denounced? Sure it should.

On the Competitors Radio Show, Greg said:

"For some reasons in today's world, they love to shoot the messenger instead of listening to the messenger, and I'm just saying "okay, how do we solve this problem?" and a lot of the messengers that are saying this are immediately getting punched upon, and the problem is not going away. It's not me by speaking out against drugs that's causing this bad publicity for cycling, it's those who choose to cheat and take drugs. That's what's causing the damage."

Who is blasting the image of sport now? Greg LeMond... or Vinokourov, Kasheshkin, Rasmussen, Landis and oh so many others?

I picked up my side long ago.

Another interview: more anti-UCI comments

The Denver Post has another interview with Greg LeMond, where he is even more straightforward about his opinion on the UCI

What more can be done? LeMond said start at the top.

"You've got to get rid of the UCI (international governing body)," he said. "There's corruption in the UCI. It goes back. You have certain athletes donating money for doping machines. Ethically it crosses a barrier. It sends a message that: Are all the riders really being tested? That's what's going on in the minds of the peloton."

He also expresses his doubts about inside-team testing, with this memorable quote ;-):

"Pro teams for 15 years have been doing their own testing. They've been testing how to get away with it."

LeMond optimistic

Greg LeMond was interviewed by Zak Brown for Daily Camera, while he was in Boulder, CO, for the Tour de Cure.

He is talking about his view on the UCI. I highlighted a few things that seemed the most important for me:

LeMond upbeat about cycling's future

A Tour de France filled with negative news isn't even a month removed, and one of America's greatest cyclists, and one of its most outspoken, says he is "the most optimistic I have been in years" about the sport.

Greg LeMond, the first American to win the Tour de France, was back Friday near the scene of the Boulder-based Coors Classic, which he called his "favorite race," even over the Tour. LeMond is in Longmont for the Tour de Cure, a charity ride for the American Diabetes Association that will happen today.

His has been a highly sought-after voice in the wake of this year's Tour, which ended in a victory for Spain's Alberto Contador only after whole teams dropped out and the race leader was booted in the middle of the race. LeMond has never been shy to speak about controversy in the sport, and he talked at length Friday about what can be done to help the sport he said he has always loved.

"I think we're fleshing out a lot of people who are leaving," he said. "I think a lot of people are leaving not because they can't get sponsors, but because (investigators are) getting serious. The guys that have been getting away with it don't want to be caught."

LeMond spoke Friday night about changes in the international doping system, including criminalizing offenses and taking testing away from governing bodies, and also about the bright future of Boulder's Taylor Phinney. LeMond has routinely spoken about doping, and even questioned the doping innocence of seven-time Tour winner Lance Armstrong in the past.

When he returned to France this year and spoke with Tour director Christian Prudhomme, he suggested drastic changes in the way the sport is policed, and sticks by those suggestions.

"I was asked what I thought could be done, and the first thing I said was to divorce yourself from the (International Cycling Union)," LeMond said. "They're in a war in a fight over TV rights. The UCI has been negligent in the sense that they've known what's been going on in cycling. But they have done a much better job under (UCI head) Pat McQuaid, no doubt."

Other changes he suggested were to sequester riders two hours before race so there is no unsupervised access to the riders, randomly testing 20 riders every day and lowering allowable hematocrit levels from 50 percent to 46 percent, which would eliminate the ability to use EPO undetected. LeMond acknowledged the difficulty of testing for blood transfusions, which are undetectable. But he did suggest to eliminate all injections - even vitamin injections - unless they are administered by a race doctor.

They may seem like drastic changes, but the sport has reached a point where drastic measures are likely needed after the cheating improved testing has revealed.

"How is it that one team can perform and never have a positive, and then all these riders go to different teams, and they're all busted?" said LeMond, who won three yellow jerseys. "So within the athletes, there's kind of this, 'What's going on,' and it forces them to kind of try to keep up."

The biggest change would be to criminalize doping in cycling, which has proven difficult. But, he says, by increasing the penalty for cheating, those trying to root out cheaters would have much more leverage.

"There would be the ability to plea-bargain prison sentences, so when riders get busted they can rat out the system and come back to racing in much heavier testing," he said. "It needs to be criminalized because they are trafficking in illegal drugs. They are prescription drugs, but they are being illegally distributed throughout the peloton. You make sure it's very transparent, and then that increases the credibility of the sport."

Because of his status as one of America's best, LeMond will likely always be asked to evaluate this country's cycling. With high-profile doping cases involving Boulder's Tyler Hamilton, disputed Tour de France winner Floyd Landis and the cloud of suspicion over Armstrong, some have questioned whether the sport can recover in the U.S. It doesn't help, LeMond said, that cyclists like Greg Strock said in 2000 that the U.S. cycling federation injected him with illegal doping substances when he was a junior racer in 1990.

"Our federation is not the greatest example. So basically I don't trust our cycling federation," he said. "And even if we do have education, no matter what, athletes are competitive, and they need to know that if it's really being caught, they don't have to (dope)."

LeMond does see hope in Boulder's Taylor Phinney, the son of one of LeMond's greatest contemporaries, Davis Phinney, and gold medal cyclist Connie Carpenter. The younger Phinney recently won the junior men's world time trial and appears to be poised for a stellar career.

"He could be one of our most talented riders coming up. At first I thought, 'Oh, I'm so happy for him,'" said LeMond, who won the Coors Classic in 1981 and 1985 . "And then I thought, 'Oh, I'm so sad for him.' Because I don't know if I was the parent, and my son would have won the worlds, that I would allow him to pursue it on the professional level. I am optimistic that there is a change and it's shifting, and that maybe Taylor Phinney can have a chance like I did where you don't have to decide to either sell your soul to be part of a sport or having your dignity and be proud of doing it on your own."

LeMond will ride today in the Tour de Cure, and was hoping to do the century ride to Estes Park. The rides begin at 6 a.m. at the Boulder County Fairgrounds, and riders can register today. There will also be a festival at the fairgrounds during the rides.

So... Greg's very low consideration of the UCI is once again made clear here. Another point that I find interesting, and I've been wondering about that possibility when the cases of blood doping were talked about during last Tour -and particularly the fact that autologuous transfusions were undetectable- : wouldn't it be possible to check for needle marks on riders? Of course the exam can seem borderline too invasive, and there's the possibility of simple vitamin injections... Greg suggests to have a control on those injections too. Why not?

De Mondenard: "only one person"

Greg LeMond has been interviewed about the last Tour de France, and here is what he said:

Red flag' on Evans' rival
From correspondents in New York
July 27, 2007 THREE-time Tour de France champion Greg LeMond said today that it was unfair to brand Michael Rasmussen a cheat without looking at those around him.

And he warned there was a "red flag" on the new man in the yellow jersey, Discovery Channel rider Alberto Contador from Spain, who stands between Cadel Evans and an historic Australian victory in Paris on Monday (AEST).

Indeed, LeMond believes there should be no champion this year.

In a dramatic few days on the crisis-hit race, long-time leader Rasmussen was sensationally turfed out by his Rabobank team.

France's No.1 team, Cofidis, pulled out after it was revealed that Italian rider Cristian Moreni had tested positive for testosterone, while Astana also quit following favourite Alexandre Vinokourov's dope test failure.

"If Rasmussen got caught, and if you want to be equal, you have to implicate other riders, too," LeMond said.

"You have a lot of riders against whom there's a lot of evidence and relations to certain doctors. Those riders are getting away with it.

"Alberto Contador and Rasmussen are at 60kgs each and both are climbing as fast as (Marco) Pantani did. That's a red flag right there," he said in a reference to the late Italian, a superb climber who won both the Tour de France and Giro d'Italia in 1998.

"Contador has been involved in Operation Puerto'" he added, citing the doping scandal that rocked Spain.

"I'm not pointing fingers at Contador. I'm just saying that if you point fingers at Rasmussen, you have to look at the riders next to him."

LeMond said he thought the Tour de France would be better served if it didn't name a champion this year.

"I would prefer to see a non-Tour de France winner," he said.

"It's more symbolic."

However, he said the opinions sprouting around Europe, that the latest scandals will spell the end of the Tour, are wrong, although he does believe the reputation of cycling as a competitive sport is in jeopardy.

"The Tour will survive," LeMond said.

"The Tour is an event. It has a glorious past. It has a history. The Tour will never go away. During three weeks, riders become actors. Actors with a story to tell. If you remove those actors, and replace them, you'll still have the drama and the flavor the Tour brings.

"What I'm pessimistic about is the credibility of cycling as a whole.

"Each time we thought things are looking better, then we take a dive."

LeMond said the positive tests revealed only the tip of the iceberg, that drug cheats still abounded in the peloton, and riders were under pressure to keep quiet about it.

"There's a strong omerta," he said. "But it's changing."

The doping control system needs to improve to hasten progress, he said.

"There's too many loopholes," said LeMond.

"For instance, none of the riders are tested before the start of the race. The only tests occur early in the morning, which means they can pretty much do anything they want before the start.

He called for a body independent of Tour officials and the International Cycling Union to take over, with funding by the government and more punitive measures for those caught cheating.

Agence France-Presse

Almost the same thing, in French:

27 juillet 2007
Greg LeMond: "Pas surpris"

Triple vainqueur du Tour de France, Greg LeMond n'est pas étonné de voir la Grande Boucle à nouveau touchée par des scandales de dopage. L'Américain fait part de ses doutes quant au nouveau porteur du maillot jaune, Alberto Contador.

-> Etes-vous surpris par les affaires qui ont éclaté sur le Tour de France ?

- Pas vraiment. Quand vous regardez la vitesse à laquelle certains coureurs grimpent les cols, ils vont aussi vite qu'à l'époque de Pantani. Ce qui me choque, c'est la relation que peuvent encore entretenir certains avec le Docteur Ferrari. Ils pensent qu'ils ne peuvent y arriver sans lui.


-> L'équipe Rabobank a-t-elle bien fait de renvoyer Michael Rasmussen du Tour alors qu'il n'a pas été contrôlé positif ?

- Si on a puni Rasmussen, alors il faut impliquer d'autres coureurs contre lesquels les preuves sont bien plus grandes. Ce n'est pas normal que ces coureurs puissent s'en sortir. Quand je pense que Floyd Landis (contrôlé positif lors de sa victoire en 2006) s'est défendu en clamant que les échantillons testés par le laboratoire français étaient manipulés, que les Français étaient contre lui et qu'il n'y avait pas de culture de dopage en cyclisme... Soit Floyd est un grand naïf, soit il est vraiment de mauvaise foi.


-> Pour vous, il y a donc encore des coureurs dopés dans le peloton?

- C'est évident. Les coureurs savent bien qui est dopé et qui ne l'est pas. Prenez Contador par exemple (ndlr: Alberto Contador, le nouveau leader). Rasmussen et lui ont le même gabarit. Ils pèsent aux alentours de 60 kilos et tous les deux grimpent aussi vite que Pantani en son temps. C'est déjà suffisant pour lever le drapeau rouge. En plus, son nom a été associé à l'affaire Puerto. Je ne pointe pas Contador du doigt. Mais je dis juste que si on a attrapé Rasmussen, alors il faut regarder de plus près ce que font ses concurrents.


-> Pourquoi les coureurs continuent-ils à se doper s'ils savent que tôt ou tard ils vont se "faire coffrer"?

- Si vous regardez de plus près, très peu de coureurs se font attraper. Il y a trop de mailles dans le filet. Et il en sera ainsi tant que nous ne modifions pas les méthodes de contrôle. Par exemple, aucun des coureurs n'est contrôlé avant le départ de la course. Les seuls contrôles se déroulent tôt le matin. Ce qui veut dire qu'ils peuvent faire à peu près ce qu'ils veulent avant le départ. L'UCI et les organisateurs du Tour font du bon boulot. Mais pour obtenir des résultats durables et éradiquer le dopage, il faudrait créer une structure indépendante, dans le même genre que l'AMA mais que pour le cyclisme. Cette entité serait financée par les gouvernements et aurait un pouvoir punitif. Je ne vois que cette solution pour aboutir à davantage de transparence.


-> Devrait-il avoir un vainqueur dimanche sur les Champs-Elysées?

- Non. J'aurais préféré que les organisateurs n'octroient pas de maillot jaune. Cela aurait été un geste symbolique.


-> Le Tour de France a-t-il sérieusement perdu de sa crédibilité selon vous?

- Je ne m'en fais pas pour le Tour. Il survivra. Le Tour, c'est d'abord un événement avec une histoire, un passé glorieux. Durant trois semaines, les coureurs deviennent des acteurs. Si vous retirez ces acteurs et vous les remplacez par d'autres, le Tour gardera toujours de sa saveur. Là, où je suis assez pessimiste, c'est pour l'image du cyclisme qui a pris un sérieux coup. Chaque fois qu'on se dit : ça va aller un peu mieux, on replonge."

Of course you can read reactions about that on the net, many people, as usual, just wishing Greg didn't speak out, and wondering why he should be listened to.

One of the reasons he should be listened to is that he was one of the first to speak out against doping, and has been right so far in all his 'allegations'... Had he been listened to earlier, maybe cycling wouldn't be in the situation it is now. Like it or not, he has been a messenger all along. Many people would like to be able to prove he doped, in order to make him a non-legitimate messenger. Fact is, Greg is one of the least suspicious riders of the Tour de France history. I'm not saying that just as a blinded fan. I'm not the only one saying that.

Dr. De Mondenard, a physician who's been very outspoken against doping, so outspoken that he often comes off as vindictive, said on July 26th on the german channel ARD:

'I have set up more than 4000 dossiers about professional participating in The Tour De France since 1947. All of them connected in some way to doping. There is only one person I have found nothing. It's Greg LeMond'.

This interview can be watched here.

Believing that Greg LeMond was clean can be seen as only a belief. I guess it will never be proven for sure. But the absence of any suspicions about him is a fact. With speaking out, he's been ready to put himself in a position where his past as a clean rider has be questioned, and precisely and exhaustively checked. What came out of it? Zero suspicion.That's a fact.

"L'Express" interview from July, 12th, 2007

The French magazin L'Express of July 12th, 2007, has a quite long interview, with a few funny pictures, of Greg LeMond about doping. Nothing really new there: he's coming back on his relationship with Armstrong and the Landis affair... Here and there he is exposing a few things I didn't hear before, for instance about the atmosphere in the peloton and in his team around 1991-1993.

I translated the full thing, as best as I could (and I'm far from being a professional translator), trying to make it really close to the french version but still readable. I have my doubts about how the interview was actually conducted. It must have been done in english, so already one translation altered the original thing. Some parts sound a bit "artificial" in the french version.

People who already dislike Greg will for sure be shocked by his words. He has some quite harsh words about both Armstrong and Landis, but also about Vinokurov. And of course about Dr. Ferrari. I think his tone is even more straightforward than I ever heard before.


The article in french can be read here.
L'article en français peut être trouvé ici.

Greg LeMond

"Doped riders are like drug-addicts"




This man is a pioneer: the first American to win the Tour de France at a time (1986) when cycling was ignoring globalization. That year, Greg LeMond wins over his teammate Bernard Hinault, and the picture of the two champions crossing together, hand in hand, the finish line at l'Alpe d'Huez, was shown worldwide. LeMond won again the Tour in 1989 and 1990, before leaving a peloton where EPO was beginning its carnage. Today this wealthy 46-year-old businessman does not recognize anymore the sport that made him a king. The victories of his compatriots, Lance Armstrong and Floyd Landis, tarnished with allegations of doping, leave him with a bitter taste in his mouth. As far as the anti-doping war goes, "the revolution is still to accomplish" for him.



E: The Tour de France just started in an atmosphere of suspicion. What do you think about it?
GL: When you see that Alexander Vinokurov, one of the favorites, announce that he works with Dr Ferrari (italian doctor with a very suspicious reputation, allegedly at the origin of EPO in the peloton), it is unbelievable! Vinokurov talks about him as the best physical preparator in the world. But there is no secret. As far as training or diet go, revolutionary methods do not exist. This doctor is known only for one thing: doping. The UCI should say: "if you work with that man, you cannot compete in the Tour de France."



E: You won your third and last Tour in 1990. The following year, you finish 7th, far behind the spanish Miguel Indurain. Was EPO already spread in the peloton?

GL: Looking back to it, I think that everything changed that year. I was riding with the Z-Team, and maybe in all my career I never had such a level of fitness. A few days before the start, I did the same test as I always did before my preceeding victories: two and a half hours of riding behind a derny (motocycle shielding the cyclist from the wind while training) along a canal in Belgium. I was never over 80km/h before, and then, I rode at 85km/h, with a heart rate of 180 beats/minute! The first day, I finished 2nd of the prologue, I called my wife and said: "Get the Champagne ready! There's no competitors..." And it was true. The only dangerous guy, theoretically, was Chiappuci, a "domestique". During the first stage I broke away and took the yellow jersey. It got bad on the fifth day, around Reims. To avoid falls, I usually try to be in the first ten of the peloton. But here, I had a really hard time to stay in front. The guys were riding like motocycles! I called my wife: "Actually, maybe I'm not in so good shape."



E: You didn't understand what was going on?

No, I didn't. I did only later. Years later. When the first admissions came, the first deaths... During the Tour 1991, in the time-trial in Alencon, I thought I was winning by 5 minutes. I was flying! But Indurain beat me by 8 seconds. I thought then that it was my old problem of allergy that was impeding me. Later, in the stage Quimperle-Saint Herblain, the peloton rode at a record average speed close to 50km/h. I was close to Charly Mottet, an experimented cyclist, and we looked at each other about 30km from the finish and said: "Waw... what is going on?". Over all those years, we searched for explanations to our debacles in over-training and revolutionary methods. It was turning us crazy. I remember that during the Giro d'Italia, the coach of the Z-Team, Roger Legeay, decided that we needed to be put on a diet: no fat, no olive oil, no dessert. After two weeks, the whole team abandoned. We only had skin on our bones.



E: You never doped?

GL: No. And I didn't always understand what I was told. I am American, not french or belgian. For long I didn't get the subtilities of the language. When I was asked if I was "medically taken care of properly", I was answering that I wasn't sick. When asked if I was well "prepared", I was showing my training schedules books. It's probably in 1988, after my hunting accident, that I was the closest in touch to doping. I signed with the dutch team PDM and they had decided to try "things" on their riders. Their doctor was asserting that I needed to be physiologically "re-equilibrated" because I had lost a lot of blood the preceeding year. Luckily that year I hardly raced. On the other hand, Gert Jan Theunisse, one of the leaders of the team, was banned from the Tour de France after being tested positive to testosterone.



E: What was your state of mind when you left the peloton in 1994?

GL: It wasn't my world anymore. Roger Legeay, who was my coach for all those years, is telling that I had only one expression in my mouth at that time: "I am tired". One of my teammates had a discussion in 1993 with a spanish rider from the team Once. He came back like crazy and yelled at Legeay: "Here is what the others are taking, testosterone, EPO, growth hormones... So if you want us to get results, stop threatening us of cutting off our pay by two and hire a doctor!" The following year, Casado left for an italian team, Jolly Componibili. I met him on the roads of the Tour of Switzerland. He was laughing. He explained to me that two laboratory buses were following his team all the time and that he finished the Tour of Spain without any pain. He kindly teased me and went away. Three weeks later I decided to quit cycling. The next year, Philippe Casado died of a heart attack. He was 30.



E: Ten years after the end of your career, you took firm positions against doping, and put yourself in a position against your compatriot Lance Armstrong (seven times winner of the Tour de France). How was your relationship with him until then?

GL: In 1998 he called me and invited me for dinner. I think that at a point he must have thought that our stories were similar. I came back to the top after my hunting accident. He wanted to come back after cancer. That evening Lance told me that he wanted to win the Tour de France. I thought: "It's impossible. He never finished in the top 30 before..." He looked like he wanted to be my friend, but he also looked annoyed to be compared to me. He didn't look comfortable. He's someone who lives with a rage inside of him. I don't think he is a happy man. But in 1999 and his first success in the Tour, I believed in his great comeback. After the Festina affair (Richard Virenque team was banned from the Tour 1998 for doping), I thought that the peloton had been cleaned. I didn't have contact with Armstrong anymore, but I was happy to see an American at the top of cycling. And I had my bike business: an American winning the Tour, it was all good for business!



E: In 2004, in the book "L.A. Confidentiel", you ended up putting in question the honesty of his victories.

GL: All I said about Lance at that point is that I was disappointed that he was working with Dr. Ferrari. Being seen with that guy, that was insane! After the book was published, Lance called me. He threatened to find ten people who would assert I took EPO to win in 1989. I answered that I did win the Tour before EPO appeared, and that my victories were not a miracle, but obtained after two years of suffering and work. There's no mystery: I know my respiratory capacity and his. He has the one of a Fiat, I had the one of a Testarossa! From then on I started receiving threats from people around him. I was told to take back what I said, to apologize... Armstrong's agent and lawyer, Bill Stapleton, even made false apologies published in USA Today under my name. In October 2005, I was called to testify at the trial between Armstrong and an insurance company, which was refusing to pay him because of doping allegations. There I only said again what I said about Dr. Ferrari.



E: Now you are in a conflict with another compatriot, Floyd Landis, winner of the Tour 2006...
GL: It felt like the story with Armstrong was happening all over again. I was really surprised because I thought that Floyd, by opposition to Lance, was a "good guy". When I learnt that he had been tested positive on the Tour 2006, I declared: "If he cheated, it's terrible. But in that case, he should say the truth and save this sport". A few days later, on August 6th, Floyd called me. We had a long conversation, very human, almost friendly. I told him that he could free himself from a so heavy secret and try to start back on new basis. To encourage him to break the wall of silence, I told him a very personal story: I was the victim of sexual abuse. I wanted to make him see that at certain points you need the courage to talk. We agreed that this conversation should stay between us. But after that, to defend himself against doping accusations, Floyd Landis made a lot of comments on a website. He wrote about me: "I'd rather ask Satan for advice than calling Greg LeMond". He also wrote really low things about me, things like: "If I told you what Greg confided to me...". He was insinuating that I was a bad person, that I admitted to him that I did something terrible... I was flabbergasted when I read that.



E: Since then, your relationship kept on deteriorating...
GL: Last May, I was called as a witness at the trial between the USA Anti-doping Agency and Landis. I wasn't sure that I wanted to go, but thinking back of how he tried to damage my reputation, I told myself: "I'm going". The day before the hearing, I got an anonymous call (LeMond found out the same evening that it was a call by Will Geoghan, Landis' manager and friend, and that Landis was with him when the call took place). The man was trying to intimidate me. He was refering to the sexual abuse I suffered. But Geoghan was making up a new story, talking about an uncle that would have molested me. Actually it was a friend of the family... (his voice is breaking). I instantlly thought that this affair was going to be thrown on the public place. It was sickening. I hung up. I called back the number that was written on my cellphone screen five minutes later. Landis' manager first pretended to not understand, to not know who Floyd was... It was crazy. The next day I explained in court what happened. I had the proof that Landis and people surrounding him were able to do anything. I got convinced he was guilty. He is a liar: I don't think he can be consider as a Tour de France winner.


E: How does the american audience see the affairs concerning Armstrong and Landis?

GL: American people don't want to believe that they doped. People don't want to know, especially about Lance. His cancer makes him untouchable. Today several sportsmen are in the middle of a network of evidence. They are not caught shooting a gun, but with the smoking gun still in their hand. It's not enough. People put too much admiration and hope in their heroes. They can't admit the slightest doubts. Telling them that their champion cheated is like attacking them directly.


E: Which means do you suggest against doping?

GL: Most importantly tests should be conducted by laboratories that are totally independent of sport federations. Some simple measures could also be taken: first, develop a reliable test to detect growth hormones, one of the main products used. Then, lower the allowed blood cells count, which is 50% today. This pushes those who have a count below that to take EPO to reach just that limit... Finally, why not conduct retroactive controls, going 10 years back (the idea is to use recent methods to analyze old samples from preceeding years)? In case of doping, the victory or the title would be taken back.


E: It goes with the risk to have to cross the names of the ten last winners of the main races!
GL: If it's what it takes, then let's do it! Either the race remains without a winner, or you go down in the classification to find the first clean rider... If those tests existed, some sportsmen would think on longer terms. Today if you're not caught right away, it's okay. Doped riders have the mentality of drug addicts. They don't think anymore about the consequences of their acts. If you knew, right from the beginning of your career, that you could be caught ten years later, you'd have another view on competition.

The Tour started...

PezCycling has Greg's views on the first week of the Tour de France. After all the agitation with the Landis arbitration, I like to hear Greg talking about plain cycling... to see he is still passionate about the Tour.

It was planned that he would go with his son Geoffrey at l'Etape du Tour on July 16th, I'm waiting for news about it...

Otherwise in the news, many articles talking about the Tour and doping mention Greg and the Landis affair, as well as reminding Greg's accusations about Lance. Paul Kimmage has a new article about the start of the Tour de France in London, and the history of doping since the 1990's:

zero tolerance is the only way forward. There is just one question. Why didn’t this happen when riders were dying from conditions brought on by their drug abuse in the 1990s? Why has it taken until the sport is on its knees?

Kimmage also recalls Greg's quote from last week "Big Interview":

“This sport needs to bleed to death before it can rebuild”

Why has it gone so far?

Where I stand

LeMond bashers are all really loud out here on the internet, and I doubt big time that they are really more numerous than LeMond admirers... just... louder and more eager to babble the same arguments against him over and over again.

First I got really annoyed with this bashing, but now it just makes me roll my eyes, and recent developments in the cycling world are making me really proud to be a LeMond fan.

I'm french and discovered cycling thanks to Greg. I got dragged by my mom when I was 13 to go see the arrival of the time trial of the Tour de France in 1989 in my hometown of Rennes. It was raining heavily, I got squeezed painfully against barriers, and yet I got hooked. The sound of the wheels on the cobblestones, the incredible pace of each rider arriving, it all just felt fascinating. And then in the far, there was this guy standing on the podium with a yellow jersey and a flashy pink cap. I loved the colours...

After more smashing in the crowd and fighting to get out of the fuss, my mom and I got stuck close to a stage where the post-race show "A chacun son tour" was filmed. And on that stage, a few meters away from me, the guy with the yellow jersey and the pink cap was being interviewed. His adorable accent while speaking french amused me, and he was telling he wanted to thank his wife for this victory and that he was happier than when we won the Tour in 1986.

Faint memories of an American winning the Tour a few years before came back to my mind... I also remembered the news of that American rider getting injured and not able to defend his title. But all was really blurry on my mind.

In the next few days, I didn't miss any broadcasting of the Tour stages. I got totally appealed to the story of this guy who seems so happy to just be on his bike, always smiling, nice with journalists and making funny comments. I must also acknowledge that teen me found him really handsome.

The Tour 1989 was a pure delight to follow. And the final time trial was the most exciting sport event I ever saw in my life. Being a Greg LeMond fan on July 23rd, 1989 was a blessing. As we say in french: "Le pied total"!

I followed the next Tours and other important races that were shown on TV with great thrill. I gathered all press articles about Greg I could find. I cried when he announced his retirement in 1994. And I grew up, and forgot about the Tour, forgot about Greg...

Until 2001. At that time, I knew Lance Armstrong was the new champion. I found his story also quite interesting... I had quite a bit of admiration for the guy. I watched the Tour sporadically, with a bit of nostalgia, remembering the excitement it gave me at the end of my childhood. But somehow, nothing felt really appealing. Those guys look too much like robots. None of them were answering interviews in french with cute accents anymore... None of them looked like smiling kids happy to ride a bike.

And then came the LeMond controversy. And as many, I first wondered. I didn't like what I was hearing. I didn't want to think about doping. During all my former LeMond fan years, I was shrugging at and pushing away all the doping insinuations. My Greg was clean. The full peloton was clean. These guys were heroes.

And I didn't like to hear the guy I remembered as "utterly nice Greg" critizing someone. And I wondered. Is he jealous of Lance? I needed to know more.

In my pile of old articles from the 1990's, I found back one article where
Greg was mentioning Dr Ferrari and the danger that this man was going to be for the future of cycling. I wasn't convinced, but I started to get big doubts about what cycling had become.

I kept on following cycling from far, as well as what Greg was saying about it... I got back a bit of interest. I replayed my tapes of the Tours 1989 to 1992. I still loved what I was watching.

And then came 2004 and the Simeoni episode. All my admiration for Lance disappeared instantly. That guy appeared to me as a brute, a man ready to all to win and make others shut up.

I'm now thinking Armstrong is a cheat, and one of the godfathers of the mafia system that cycling has become. I think he is threatening people opposing him. I think the money involved around him and his image as a hero will probably protect him for the rest of his life.

Notice that I said "I'm thinking". Not "I'm convinced". Not need to scream at me... If you have arguments to convince me I'm wrong, my ears are wide open.

And I won't yell at people who say LeMond is a bitter old champion full of sour grapes. If that's your opinion, then try to convince me that you're right. Without reharshing the same false arguments (for instance the usual "LeMond must have doped, he held the record for the fastest time trial in the Tour for 15 years"). I won't ban negative comments about Greg here. Express yourself!

The recent event, the USADA vs. Landis arbitration, LeMond's revelations of his very painful childhood, his courage in testifying and coming out, have increased my admiration for the man big time.

Greg LeMond, the nice, polite, smiling young rider, turned into a tall man of high standards, honesty and coherence. A true human being. Let me say it once again, I'm proud to be a LeMond fan.

The Big Interview

If you're interested in Greg LeMond, you already know that the big recent news about Greg is the interview he did with Paul Kimmage.

Though it's an interesting reading, where we can learn more about the timing, circumstances and consequences of Greg's sexual abuse, the full article is quite frustrating, blurry in its chronology, and giving the idea that Paul Kimmage is interrupting Greg. I'd rather have had more direct quotes from Greg.

It's a shock to realize that Greg was hiding such a dark secret for several decades. When the news came out during the USADA vs. Landis arbitration, I didn't expect that he told his family so recently only. It's impossible to imagine what he's been through all these years. Behind his huge smile on podiums, he was hiding a big load of fear and shame... and was carrying this all alone.

I wanted to be seen as a good person,” LeMond says, “and never wanted to let people down, but I found it hard to handle the fame or adulation. I didn’t feel worthy of it. I was ashamed by who I thought I was because I felt partly responsible [for the abuse] and I was never able to enjoy the stuff I should have been able to enjoy. My first thought when I won the Tour was: ‘My God, I’m going to be famous’, and then I thought, ‘He’s going to call’. I was always waiting for that phone call. I lived in fear that anyone would ever find out.

The statistics about coming out about abuse are terrifying. The average time span between the abuse and talking is 17 years... It's considered that about 85% of men who were abused never come out. That says quite a lot about the amount of shame victims are carrying. I hope that Greg's admission will help other people.

I find the link that Kathy LeMond makes between her husband's past and his view on doping convincing and quite fascinating:

We’ve done a lot of talking about this,” Kathy says. “Why wouldn’t Greg have gone to [Dr X]? Why not? I think Greg was carrying such a load of shame that, like he said, he couldn’t have survived a positive drug test, he probably couldn’t. He had to have something to hold on to that was pure and good about himself, and cycling was that.

It's a bit like hearing Greg say: "I rode clean, but I didn't have any merit, I couldn't do otherwise".
I think Greg's always shown understanding and compassion for riders who admitted to doping. I never heard him sounding judgemental. Pointing his finger to the system and the corruption, to the unethical doctors, but not to the riders (except one of them maybe...). I really don't think he is putting himself on a pedestal above other riders.

Finally, I'm not so happy to see Greg bitter about Landis, and wanting him punished for the infamous call, while it's not clear FL had actually anything to do with the call. But Landis' post on the Daily Peloton Forum was pretty clear and threatening, and I guess enough to trigger Greg's anger. Greg mentions having dealt with a lot of therapy about it, probably to accept that there was nothing to be ashamed of, to realize no one could judge him for that, or use it against him... Landis' post asserting he knew something about Greg that could "severely damage his character", and the threatening phone call by Geoghegan, must have felt pretty destroying. The interview with Kimmage shows that it was far from an easy task for Greg to come testifying.

On another note, Greg was interviewed on Open Source Radio not long ago, talks about doping, and about the recent admissions by Zabel and Riis, and you can see here once again that Greg seems to strongly believe in "The Truth will set you free". He's on from 25'23'' on.