On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:42:45 -0700, Miguel Naughton
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> he [Greg] confirms the violent threat stuff that
> was in the LA Confidential book.

From what I have read Kathy Lemond merely alleged that Armstrong
threatened to make Lemond's own EPO use an issue if Lemond continued
to publicly question Armstrong.

> He says that his V02 max, a measure of aerobic > capacity, used to be the best in the peloton.
> Now he wouldn't even be 50th with his V02 Max, > all due to EPO.

Oh, and vast improvements in training methods have had no effect?
Come on, how many guys in the late eighties and early nineties were
sleeping in alttitude tents?

> A: There are no miracles in cycling.  There's
> always an explanation.

Wait, does Lemond have Alzheimers already?  Correct me if I am wrong,
but did not Lemond return from death's doar to win Le Tour a couple of

> Then Greg goes on to explain how he and other > champions were great right from the start.  This > was not the case with Lance, thus implying
> doping.

First, Indurain, was far from great in his first several tours; a
couple retirements, a 97th, etc.  Second, Lance was a one of the best
single-day road racers in the world just as soon as he turned pro.
Did he not win the 1993 World Championships?  However, it is common
knowledge that Armstrong was too big to contend for the GC and that
through his comeback from cancer he was able to remake his muscle
structure, so that he is much lighter than in his youth.

Interestingly, in the article, Lemond repeatedly says that he could
never have used EPO because his hematocrit levels never exceeded 45%.
This is little different from Armstrong's current excuse of never
having had a positive test.

Armstrong likely dopes, but this is pretty shabby "evidence" that he does.

--Matt K.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SkiVt-L is brought to you by the University of Vermont.

To unsubscribe, visit