Why write the letter? Is Hampsten buddies with Lemond or something? Maybe he was hired by Trek to do damage control (Lemond brand). If doping is so rampant in the US then maybe they should test more for it.

I hope that Lemond got trapped by Le Monde :) into going too far in his comments about Lance.

It is one thing to decry the use of drugs in sport and yet another to strongly suggest that a particular individual is not clean. Suspicions are one thing, but proof should be presented to support such allegations. Lemond is not being heroic or brave by making unsubstantiated allegations. What can Hampsten be thinking, or is he thinking at all?

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

I don't think Lemond was "trapped" during his interview because he said similar things in on air interviews for ESPN among others.

As for accusations, it is one thing to say that drug use and doping are rampant in cycling, it is another to point a finger in someone's direction, especially if that person has never tested positive for anything. I hate to use the baseball analogy again, but I can safely say that steroid use is widespread in MLB, but I can't point to anyone person and say that because of his performance or association with somone that that athlete is on drugs. Hampsten never says that Lance, or Jan, or anybody else is doping, he simply states a concern for the sport, and encourages us and those in control to start to move towards doing something about it. I never heard Lance say that there is no drug use on the tour, just that he is clean, and his team is clean.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

and it's ok to say that Simeoni, Simoni etc... are all sissies, cry-babies, etc...but do not touch Lance, do not say anything about Lance...and Ullrich can't ride, and Kloeden is a lousy rider, but then again, nothing on Lance...one thing is true about Lance (as Lemond said)
anyone who talks against doping in cycling is either a liar or someone who wants to kill the sport.

It's interesting to me that in Hampsten's letter he references two sources for Lemond's comments- one in English that is very critical of Lance, but doesn't mention doping as a general topic at all, and one source in French that I'm unable to read. He then goes on to dismiss any possible animosity between Lemond and Armstrong as none of his business, and talks about doping as a general problem.

Thing is, I, like most readers of this site and the English news wire reports, don't read French. It might have been nice for him to supply his own translation of the French article, since that seems to be what Hampsten bases his comments on. Or maybe he should have written his letter in French. One or the other, I guess.

I have no idea what connections exist between Hampsten and Lemond, and for all I know Lemond is a great guy who truly has the best interests of the sport at heart. But that's not the way his comments came through in the English reports, and I'm wondering if he might have talked himself out of a bicycle manufacturing agreement. Pure speculation on my part. No doubt doping remains a problem in cycling and elsewhere. Hampsten's letter doesn't add much to the discussion, IMO, and seems more than anything to be an apology for Lemond's reported comments.

Ken

all the key parts of the french text are in the concise version linked on the page where the article is....anyway, here it is:



3-times winner of the TdF (86-89-90), Greg Lemond is the first american to win the Tour. He lives in Minneapolis. Since the release of LA confidential, book investigating LA, Greg says that he has been pressured to not talk. His company, Lemond Bikes is distributed by TRek, one of the main sponsors of USPS

You wife, Kathy says in LA Confidential that in july 2001, LA called you to accuse you of using EPO during your career...

His phone call was a shock, because he was very violent and threatening. Lance was saying that I couldn't have won the Tour without EPO (which improves the production of RBC). It's completely false becase there was no EPO yet during my time. A week earlier, I had given an interview to the Sunday Times in which I had expressed my opinion about Michele Ferrari (the italian doctor who coaches Lance since 1997). Lance thought that I wanted to bring him down when I just wanted to make him change his mind about working with a guy like Ferrari. Because I was convinced that his relationship with Ferrari was really bad. At this time, Ferrari was already in the center of a investigation in Italy (sport fraud since sept 2001).

What do you have against Michele Ferrari?

I met him one day in 1994, in San Diego, in a bike shop. I was looking at a device that measures power etc. He asked me what it was and what it was for. He had no knowledge about training and physical preparation. His thing was the sciences of blood. For me, it's the guy who has changed cycling.

How did this change manifest itself?

In 1990, I win my 3rd Tour and our team (Z), wins the team classification. A year later, none of us could follow the rhythm in the peloton. There was a radical change. Some riders who couldn't place well, were suddenly beating eveyrone. In 1991, I was better prepared. During the prologue, I had beaten Indurain by a few seconds. But after 2 weeks of race, the speed was so high that neither me nor my teammates could follow. In our team, everyone knew that there was a problem with EPO and other substances.

Today, what is your opinion on cycling in general and on the Tour in particular?

I am happy not to be there anymore, because today, you don't have a lot of choice. I am also disappointed to see that people are not more suspicious. With all the stories of the last few years, I am not as excited about the Tour. I am skeptical. There was always a problem with doping in our sport, but for the last 10 years, the products are much more effective and can change the physiology of an athlete. You can transform a donkey in a racing horse!

You do not believe in the victorious comeback of Lance Armstrong following his cancer?

There are no miracles in cycling. There is always an explanation. First, talent. Hinault and Merckx won the tour at their first attemps. I finished 3rd in my first tour and 2nd in my second. My physiology didn't change. After my hunting accident in 1987, it took me two years to come back, but I never got back at the same level.

The only way to go faster in cycling is to improve the O2 transport. When I was racing, my Max Vo2 was the highest in the peloton (93ml). Today, I wouldn't even be in the first 50 riders! I have studied physiology a lot and I can tell you that no training can transform someone who doesn't have a high vo2 in a champion. Training methods haven't trained much either.

And what if Lance Armstrong was to become the first rider to win 6 Tours?

People will say that I am jaelous because I am the first american to win the Tour, but even with 6 wins, it will have nothing to do with the past. Because of all the things that have happened in the last 10 years, it's not the same as the 5 wins of Hinault for instance.

Lance says that I am the only Tour winner not to support him. I was a big Lance fan in 1999. But with all these stories, it is hard to remain a fan.

Lance Armstrong answers to doubters that he has never tested positive.

Everybody says that. But David Millar has never tested positive either. But he has admitted having used EPO. Each year, new doubts add up, little by little with the police finding things in Italy or France and riders telling the truth like Jesus Manzano, admitting that they are on drugs. The problem with Lance is that you can't talk with him

For him, you are either a liar, like Christophe Bassons or Jesus Manzano, or you are trying to destroy cycling. I just say that I want to know the truth when I am watching the Tour de France. Lance is ready to do anything to preserve his secret. But I don't know how he will be able to go on convincing everyone of his innocence

Reported by Stephane Mandard, Translated (poorly but fast) by Francois ST.com member who is bored :-)

Thanks for posting the interview Francois...

It's the last sentence in ths interview that really kills me.

"But I don't know how he will be able to go on convincing everyone of his innocence"

I know innocent until proven guilty is a part of U.S. criminal procedure and not international law or the norms of international sport, but since when does someone have to prove that they are innocent in the face of completely unsubstantiated innuendo and allegation. Same thing with Ferrari. He may be guilty as hell, but if you spend a year and a half trying him for his crimes and can't get it done, then give it a rest and come back when you have evidence. When they do, I'll be the first person in line to denounce anyone proven to have acted wrongly.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

i don't know. if your intentions are to clean up the sport then putting pressure on ferrari by keeping him under a microscope will probably slow him down. policing does work to discourage crime.

i think ferrari, with this public statement of condoning epo use, puts himself in the situation he is in. or course he's going to be investigated. he may be innocent if so it will come out. the investigation will show others if you follow the same path it will not be a easy road.

i know a number of pro triathletes. everyone is well informed on the drug issue and most go out of their way to avoid any thing to do with doping. not just with the big hitters like epo but even the cold medicines. putting yourself close to ferrari is treading on thin ice. it puts all of cycling on thin ice. if you are anti doping then go above and beyond the call to stay clean and out of that dangerous path.

lance has not done this. lemond, hampsten and the general public see this and are disappointed. he made that bed he has to sleep in it.

Thanks Francois- the interview you posted has a very different feel than the excerpted comments from the link in Hampsten's letter, and those reported elsewhere. It seems to me that as he goes from generalities of doping to specifically accusing Lance of doping, he crosses over somewhere to a personal attack, since Lemond basically says that no number of negative tests will satisfy him. As has been pointed out innumerable times here and elsewhere, Lance will never be able to prove that he's not doping- it's impossible. You either have to believe what he says (difficult, since he's a pro cyclist talking about doping and by definition suspicious, but there's always a chance he's telling the truth) or assume that he's lying. It has to be one or the other, but if you're going to accuse him of lying, rather than just thinking it, you ought to have some evidence- I wonder if Lance will hire a lawyer and sue Lemond for defamation?

But before that, a lot of what he says makes sense, and I share his view that a large dose of skepticism is required when listening to cyclists talk about doping. I still think that Hampsten is being disingenous when he dismisses the idea that Lemond might have a personal dislike for Armstrong as partial motivation for his comments, but taken in context, Lemond's words at least flow more logically. I'm not sure that anything good will come out of the interview, but to the extent Lemond is interested in helping to clean up cycling, his heart seems to be in the right place.

Ken

these drugs are impossible to test for

you mean HGH?

I agree with your point. On the one hand, we cannot believe Lance 'just because he says so' on the other hand, what should he do to prove his innocence?

As long as they are restricted to urine tests, indeed, not much as you don't find much...what about doing like Paula Radcliffe who has blood samples taken often to show people she is clean? That's a fairly stronger statement than just saying "I am clean".

As you, I would really love Lance to be clean. He is a tremendous invididual (even though I still believe he acted as a complete prick with Simeoni, but I guess we all do at some stage), and one of the greatest bike rider. But then, I think instead of just saying "I am clean and fight doping", he should use his fame to really do something about doping, maybe "a la Radcliffe" to make a statement to others in the bunch to show "Look we can do it without the drugs" et....

Lance does get blood tested. Also there have been more than tests done to help the case he is clean. Him and his team ave been covered by the worlds press and the French authorities for signs of use or shipment of drugs. They have found nothing in 6 years.

I have no idea why a sixth in is bringing so much shit but I think it is sad.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

Everyone likes a winner if they win a little, but nobody likes a winner that wins all the time. See any number of backlash victims, the Yankees, the Cowboys, J-Lo,...etc

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

No joke.

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

Lance does get blood test for hematocrit. nothing else. it is part of the standard TdF testing procedure.
He and his team are NOT the only covered by world press. by far. but then again, watching US news, it's hard to figure this out as they talk ONLY about what's going on here, because the rest of the world doesn't exist.

So basiically, on one hand, Lance goes through the same testing as everyone else, faces the same scrutiny as everyone else, and has not tested positive for anything. Sounds good so far.

On the other hand, he wins a lot. Well that says it all, he must be dirty.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

You lost me. Are you saying that the press doesn't look for evidence of drug use? What does the US media mainly covering US stories have to do with anything?

---

customerjon @gmail.com is where information happens.

yes they do. but not restricted to USPS...far from that.