Saw the OLN show on Greg Lemond today and was struck again by the ego on that guy. On and on about how Hinault’s best Tour was the year Lemond beat him so obviously he beat Lemond was the best. Then onto how he was a great tactician and he had to be the best tactician because he never had a team to support him. Then right into how he had the talent to win 6 or 7 but never got the chance. Plus a lot of whining about how Hinault promised to help Lemond win the Tour and then didn’t. Any or all of that might be true, but you usually don’t hear classy guys talk about it like that.
Greg Lemond is the nicest guy you could ever hope to meet. If anyone looks back on the first Tour that he won, he not only had to ride against the other teams but half of his own! Then Z and Gan, what powerhouse teams those were.
He was the first. He, and other Americans like him blazed the trail. Any ego he may, or may not have, has in my opinion been earned.
I saw that too. It definitely lacked tact.
And when Franscio Salvadelli is going for # 8 15 years from now you don’t think Lance won’t be on TV pissing and moaning about how he went out on top and could have won 10 if he wanted too. Obviously, you guys are too young to appreciate what Lemond has done. Without him Lance would have 0 Tour wins!!
I saw that too. It definitely lacked tact.
Hinault is up there on with 5 wins only because LeMond let him win his last. That win would have given LeMond 4 and he got most of his with no team helping him, as if he won this years Tour on Euskatel. Lance had discovery and was only alone once or twice. Then he got shot and almost killed but recovers to win again. Then he devleops a mitochondrial problem. LeMond would have been the first to have exceeded 5 wins had luck stayed on his side.
He changed the sport, especially regarding how much riders are paid, and everyone racing today owes his a debt of gratitude.
“Obviously, you guys are too young to appreciate what Lemond has done.”
Obviously, you are too busy being superior to understand that that’s not what I said. I fully acknowledge that Lemond achieved great things. My point was that most of the great athletes, when interviewed, don’t talk about their past with that kind of ego. I don’t see why Lance would change his tune from his “It’s all about the team” chorus just because someone else wins a bunch of races. He has never claimed to be the best or better than Merckx or anything like that. He has also never blamed bis team for his own poor performances.
“Without him Lance would have 0 Tour wins!!”
Comical. I guess it was Greg Lemond dragging Lance up the mountains for the last 7 years.
"That win would have given LeMond 4 "
Actually, that win would have given Lemond 1. Who knows if he would have gone on to win more after that or not.
"LeMond would have been the first to have exceeded 5 wins had luck stayed on his side. "
Woulda, coulda, shoulda,…none of that makes any difference. If you look at luck, I’d say Lance pretty much has made his own. He rarely takes a crash at all, and when he does it’s fairly minor. Preparation does a lot to improve your “luck.” For instance, I’m fairly sure Lance doesn’t go hunting in the off season. It’s fine if Lemond wants to do that, but it’s not exactly unheard of to have people accidently get shot hunting. If you take risks, you don’t get to cry about “bad luck.”
Bullshit.
Bullshit.
So which part is BS? that Hinault wasn’t the best guy in the Tour the year he won his 5th? Or, what?
"That win would have given LeMond 4 "
Actually, that win would have given Lemond 1. Who knows if he would have gone on to win more after that or not.
"LeMond would have been the first to have exceeded 5 wins had luck stayed on his side. "
Woulda, coulda, shoulda,…none of that makes any difference. If you look at luck, I’d say Lance pretty much has made his own. He rarely takes a crash at all, and when he does it’s fairly minor. Preparation does a lot to improve your “luck.” For instance, I’m fairly sure Lance doesn’t go hunting in the off season. It’s fine if Lemond wants to do that, but it’s not exactly unheard of to have people accidently get shot hunting. If you take risks, you don’t get to cry about “bad luck.”
LeMond was as dominant in his time as Merckx was in his and Armstrong was in his.
it’s cycling. hinault ‘maybe’ wasn’t the best when he won in 1985. but Lemond was his teammate and was supposed to help him. period. I don’t hear anyone here saying Ullrich won two because he was stronger than Riis in 1996.
The following year (86) a lot of people argue that hinault was the strongest…ok, he wasn’t fair during one stage attacking Lemond, but overall there are a bunch of mountain stages where HE (not I…I got too much into it I guess 
) did a LOT of work for Lemond getting rid of all the opponents…
Lemond got 3 - Hinault got 5 and all were deserved.
ok, he wasn’t fair during one stage attacking Lemond, but overall there are a bunch of mountain stages where I did a LOT of work for Lemond getting rid of all the opponents…
You rode for Lemond in '86?
but he is pretty much right when he declared to l’Equipe that if they don’t find an american leader for the team the public won’t care about cycling anymore…
apparently the team is going to focus on popovych but will try to find a US leader…
LOL!!! I got too caught up in the action I guess
He’s just pissed his Taco Bell deal failed.
I’ve been lucky enough to sit down and chat with ole Greg…
While I will agree with your assessment, I wouldn’t with the term “ego”. Greg and Lance (I’ve never met Lance, but ride every Thurday with somethat rides with Lance 3x a year) are totally different personalities. Greg is VERY detailed and VERY knowledgable in his tactics. Just like Lance…a “student” of the Tour, cycling and fitness. The difference lies within their ways of expressing it. Lance plays poker…Greg pretty much just spits it out. Perhaps the difference between John Kerry and Howard Dean (duck for cover).
A great example would be the latest Spinervals (which I’m in, btw). Troy interviews Greg. On a rather trivial question about fitness, Lemond gives an answer worthy of a PhD dissertation. He’s a great storyteller and pretty much makes you feel as if you were there. He doesn’t hide much and enjoys (perhaps too much) expressing his lessons throughout the years.
The “feud” is rather unfortunate, but has pretty deep roots which is difficult to understand unless you lived it at that time…
it’s cycling. hinault ‘maybe’ wasn’t the best when he won in 1985. but Lemond was his teammate and was supposed to help him. period. I don’t hear anyone here saying Ullrich won two because he was stronger than Riis in 1996.
The following year (86) a lot of people argue that hinault was the strongest…ok, he wasn’t fair during one stage attacking Lemond, but overall there are a bunch of mountain stages where HE (not I…I got too much into it I guess ) did a LOT of work for Lemond getting rid of all the opponents…
Lemond got 3 - Hinault got 5 and all were deserved.
I would liken LeMond to Jackie Robinson in American Baseball. He was a total outsider and got little or no respect from his peers until he showed them how good he really was.
And he did change a lot of other things I understand, including how much the riders make. Before LeMond, I understand they were truly exploited.
LeMond’s big mistake, in my opinion, has been implying that Armstrong’s success has come from drugs.
Lemond was great, he had a great story and he was a cycling hero to American cyclists (He was the reason I started racing). Unfortunately he is a fantastic whiner and decided to whine about Lance at a time when it made him look like it was just sour grapes.
I have met Greg a number of times. I have the greatest respect for him - period. He paved the road that Lance rides on, and Lance should thank Greg for that. Greg raced a race that Lance has only heard stories about - horror stories.
Now, does Greg feel burnt? Sure, I bet he is bitter as hell. I would be - much like that of Vietnam Vets, Greg fought a battle that he was not given credit for…and not (Vietnam analogy over) another person is talking a TON of credit for things that would not have been possible with out him. Sure Lance did things on his own, Lance had the benifit of a team that would die for him…and a US team to boot. I think that Greg is only a bit bitter about the fact that no one knows who he is…and even your grandma knows of Lance.
I think that Greg would have kicked Lances ass too…
The guy won 3 TDFs and all credit to him. But why on earth should he be bitter? doesn’t sound like a life to be bitter about and can’t see LA owes him much at all? I think the Vietnam analogy is getting it slightly out of perspective.