Greg Lemond - The Greatest of Modern Time?

I think Lemond could have won 5 Tour’s, maybe more and all in an era much less tainted from doping.

My premise was that Greg could have won 6 TDFs and who knows how many other GTs and under that light maybe we could talk about him as being the greatest of all time. Now that conversation ends very quickly with Merckx and Aunquetil … but its interesting to say what if … And who would be second or third ?

If Lemond had not been shot, and had the EPO generation not robbed him of the last third of his career, he would be standing with the all time greats of cycling. Of course, not Merckx, but he could have been up there with Hinault, Coppi, Bartali, Anquetil. He was a complete rider, and a once in a lifetime physical specimen. It also worth mentioning that he had to compete against Sean Kelly in his prime. Lemond was also a keen student of the sport, and was well aware that victories outside of the Tour were vital to securing one’s place in pantheon of all time greats. Regardless of one’s distaste for him personally, we were all robbed of one the greatest gifts to professional cycling in the postwar era.

He dramatically dropped off once Indurain came around in ’91 and even if he was healthy, he would have had stiff competition from the likes of Roche, Delgado and others. Sure, he was one of the most physiological gifted athletes the world as ever seen but that itself does not give you titles. YOu can say what you will about the EPO generation but when you have a Vo2 Max of 92.5, those guys should not be blowing you out of the water like they did to him once ’91 came around.

It is hard to define the greatest stage racer because some guys can excel in one week and not three and vice versa. Think Sean Kelly, he won P-N 7 times in a row and a slew of other stage races (24 in all) but only 1 Grand Tour. Then look at Jan Ullrich, who won 2 GT’s and stood on the tour podium 6 other times but other than that he only won Suisse twice and a couple of other stage races. It is hard to make a list because you have to factor in the GT’s toughness but you cannot deny wins. So with Lemond, he would probably be near the top 5 in the post-Merckx era give or take a few positions if your just going to go by what he did in his career but if he won one more GT, then he would be 4th behind Armstrong, Contador and Indurain.

…if none of you can type his name correctly.

It’s “LeMond” with a capital “m.”

Signed,

A Greg LeMond Fan from way back before he was even a pro.

LeMond provided some nice insight on his career in this interview in 2007:

For me, Hinault, Armstrong, Indurain, Lemond (in that order) would be the top tier of post-Merckx GT racers.

Fignon, Delgado, Roche, Pantani, Ullrich (in no particular order) would be the next tier.

Contador is pretty close to the first tier (one or two more good years and he’s there IMO) and could eventually surpass them.

Armstrong ahead on Indurain. That is a close one. Closer than most people might think. Lance in his prime would have won 2-3 Giro/Vueltas at least … if he would have raced them.

I think AC will definitely be in this group in 2-3 years barring injury or assorted citizens of Kazakhstan.

I honestly don’t think LeMond had the temperament to become one of the truly greats of the sport – the guy was a whining cry baby. That he was good I do not deny. That he showed great backbone in coming back after being mistaken for a duck I do not deny. But he was fortunate to have been around when Hinault was peaking and heading down and just before EPO tore the rule book apart.

WRT his post-cycling career, it seems that he’s become something of a divisive figure, either on where you stand as regards LA or where you stand as regards doping. On the doping issue though one thing I’d love to hear LeMond discuss openly and honestly one day would be his relationship with François Bellocq.

with such comparisons is that it can be hard to agree on a set of fair assumptions. Let’s assume LeMond wasn’t shot? OK, but then do you have to assume Merckx didn’t hurt his back? [Scary thought] Or that Coppi and Bartali didn’t pedal off to war? I don’t mind doing this and then trying to determine who had the most quality. I just worry that it’s not humanly possible to untagle these factors.

I heartily agree that LeMond was one of the elite of the elite. In my fandom only he and Hinault sought to dominate both grand tours and classics. I got hooked on cycling watching LeMond in the 1985 Paris-Roubaix. He finished fourth. My only concern about him as a cyclist is that his insecurities (well-publicized even by LeMond himself) seemed a limiting factor at times. Had he not been shot and had four Tours in his pocket before Indurain came along, he might not have overtrained, he might have been less anxious about it, who knows? But he was in the top handful, and this insecurity might have only cost him a spot or two in the ultimate rankings.

LeMond was a pure physical specimen, with seemingly the desire to win, the smarts to do things right, and the openness to innovation that was crucial in those years. He had it all, and but for his accident, we might be looking at an American with a record of achievement with NO caveats: no suspicions, no criticisms of narrow focus. Lance’s blood content is none of my concern (don’t start!) and I respect his need to focus on the Tour. But LeMond raced the way I would hope to see guys race: over all types of terrain, at just about all the big events.

Getting shot DOES seem like a really extraordinary bit of bad luck, more so than what affected the other guys.

But then again, one could make the case that if it had been, say, Hinault or Merckx on that hunt, the brother-in-law would have been the one who ended up full of lead.

you always have to remember it is utterly pointless.

Who knows what could have been? Some guys only started cycling after an accident and did pretty good. Dag Otto Lauritzen for example, Olympic bronze medallist and TdF stage winner.
Another guy won both the Giro di Lombardia and the rainbow jersey while he was only 21. Died in a car crash during a race the next year. Could have been huge. No way to tell…

Counting only the guys who did good before an accident is a very biased selection.