Trek v Lemond gets a hearing today

[Dombo]

Lemond is a tit.
Armstrong makes Trek the company it is.
The bigger, stronger, richer Trek goes into partenrship with Lemond.
Lemond presses his self-destruct button by slagging LA every opportunity he gets.
And he wonders why Trek dumped him.
What a tit.

[Dombo]

Something for your Santa list, Marco:

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/lat ... tract.html

[Ben]

You could argue that Trek back in 1994/1995 weren't big and strong. Hence why they agreed to distribute a product under the Lemond brand.

[Dombo]

[quote="marco"]Things could suddenly get expensive, or awkward

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_ ... z0Wce0ZJB6

[higg]

Reading that book extract brought back memories of Lance's first win that he rarely brings up in public. He opened up something like a 3-4 min gap on Zulle in the first week when he attacked after a crash in the peloton (passage du Gois if I remember correctly). Zulle matched Lance for the next 2 weeks in the mountains and gave up near the end when he realised the gap was too big.

If Lance had adhered to the peloton etiquette / done the honorable thing and not taken advantage of the crash then who knows. He might have finished third, lost some of his sponsorship and not been able to buy out all the best tour riders over the next five years. Oh I dream. Now if only Ullrich stayed away from those cakes ..............

[Alex P]

Dom,

Haven't you got a LeMond bike?

[-Adam-]

[quote="higg"]If Lance had adhered to the peloton etiquette / done the honorable thing and not taken advantage of the crash then who knows. He might have finished third, lost some of his sponsorship and not been able to buy out all the best tour riders over the next five years. Oh I dream. Now if only Ullrich stayed away from those cakes ..............

[higg]

[quote]Anyone caught out that day deserved it, they obviously hadn't done their homework.

[Paul H]

Not sure Lemond will settle out of court as I suspect he wants his day in court so he can ask LA questions about drugs.

Lets focus on less honourable riders where there is far more evidence of drug taking e.g. Stephen Roche one of the first EPO dopers? Why doesnt he get the grief LA gets?

[higg]

I deliberately didn't mention the D-word, my main point is there are many other questionable things about LA then just the D-issues.

The original insult may have been D-related but the court case is about whether Trek honoured their commitment to Lemond bikes or whether they were intimidated/threathened by Lance to ignore the brand.

Mr Roche is another story and he also has some questionable non-D related racing tactics in his closet. Let's just say if you were the team leader you wouldn't want him as your super-domestique.

As for why he doesn't get the same hassle on D-issues as Lance, probably because by the time the blood logs became public it was all a long time ago and nobody cared. He did get a reasonable amount of hassle though when Paul Kimmage first published his book (first edition contained a few flaky insinuations, current editions are slightly different) and at the time his behaviour was slightly Lance-like in terms of dis-crediting detractors. His attitude these days is much mellower though.

[Dombo]

[quote="Alex P"]Dom,

Haven't you got a LeMond bike?

[Dombo]

[quote="Paul H"]Not sure Lemond will settle out of court as I suspect he wants his day in court so he can ask LA questions about drugs.

I only offered the tea and a slice bet to Marco. I'm not running a book for the whole club

Lets focus on less honourable riders where there is far more evidence of drug taking e.g. Stephen Roche one of the first EPO dopers? Why doesnt he get the grief LA gets?

[quote="Dombo"][quote="Alex P"]Dom,

Haven't you got a LeMond bike?

[Marcus]

STRONG ADULT CONTENT

www.youtube.com/watch?v=farVQxwvu8U

[Dombo]

Well that was a waste of mouse click. Not exactly Larry David, is he?

Reminds of those 80's "comedians" who wouldn't wash for a week, come up on stage and say "fockin Thatcher" and have the crusties in the student union falling about in helpless mirth.