>>She gave a sworn, videotaped deposition during which she repeatedly refused to answer questions pertaining to alleged drug use by Armstrong.

Read Laurent Fignon's autobiography and see if any of the riders back then were using drugs or if Greg would have any idea of what was going on. According to Fignon Greg would have had to be blind, deaf and dumb.

Greg is the ultimate crybaby IMHO, who can't let go of the past. If he wanted to talk about an ultimate comeback I'd think he would want to talk about being shot at close range with a shotgun and his rehab and riding post injury.

I'm absolutely against any drug use, for all sports. If the Powers That Be really wanted to end drug use they would install the "One Strike, You're Out Rule." Do drugs, get caught you never race again. Any thing you did before gets wiped off the record books.

i agree, LeMond has always had a problem with lance, and this year seemed to have a problem with contador too, think the whole cycling world would be better off if he kept his nose out of the sport nowadays, he had his day, now let the current crop so their stuff and enjoy his life!

Lemond has a problem with people who he thinks are not what they seem. Armstrong is just one of many. There are a lot of people in the cycling media who won't or can't speak out because the riders can hide behind the "I've never tested positive" smokescreen. You question the big boys too much, you won't get the big interviews and hence not sell magazines. Look at Lemond's results pre and post hunting accident (all pre-EPO and HGH, the real performance enhancers). He was a Tour winner before and after. Now look at other riders pre and post timeout of recent years. Either some riders are just far too good for their generation or they are one step ahead of the game. I go with the saying "If it looks too good to be true then it is too good to be true".

Lemond Cycles will have to join the likes of Kestrel because Trek had Armstrong on their bikes and every Yuppie could "be" on a Team Postal Trek. Trek bikes were not the best but affiliation goes a very long way. Unfortunate, but an unavoidable outcome in today's marketing driven world. So even if Lemond had kept queit, the outcome would have been the same.

lemond is a hero of mine from my youth and it makes me sad that he has been treated like a dog by trek, armstrong, landis etc.

true, he did himself and his brand no favours by being so outspoken of someone so powerfull, however I feel history may prove him right.

read "bad blood" for a view on doping in cycling. its interesting.

I have great respect for Lemond. I think he has great courage to take such a strong stand on doping. Everyone from journalists to other riders know what happens when you question Armstrong's ethics about doping. You lose your livelihood. I would love to hear the questions they asked of Armstrong's former wife regarding doping. It appears she refused to answer many of them. People who have good things to say are generally allowed to same them by their lawyers during a deposition.

For all of you that still hold onto the line that Armstrong has never tested positive it doesn't mean much ... Marion Jones, Miller, Rasmussen ... none of them ever tested positive. Having said this six of Armstrong's B samples from the 1999 Tour did have EPO in them when they were tested years later. This is a fact beyond dispute. According to some websites earlier this year after announcing his comeback Armstrong was offered a chance to test the remainder of the B samples. Of course he didn't.

Read this article about Armstrong's six 1999 samples that were found to have EPO in them. The article is an interview with Dr. Michael Ashenden. He assisted with the development of the EPO test for the Sydney Olympics. In his mind there doesn't appear to be any doubt that Armstrong was taking EPO during the 1999 Tour. The irony is that it seems not too many other riders were taking it during that Tour. Of 87 samples that were looked at 13 had enough EPO to be considered positives and six of those belonged to Armstrong.

The argument used by many that everyone was taking EPO doesn't stand up to these numbers. If anything the numbers suggest the opposite. The numbers suggest that in addition to the LA samples there were at most 7 samples from other people that had EPO in them. Perhaps some of other 7 samples belonged to the same riders which further shrinks the number of riders that had EPO in their samples from the 1999 Tour.

The article interestingly points out that this low number of positives for EPO may be due to the Festina affair that happened in 1998. Perhaps many riders that would have taken EPO during the 1999 Tour didn't do so because of the increased scrutiny. Obviously some were not as concerned as others since 13 samples had EPO in them.

Here is the article referred to above with the Dr. Michael Ashendon interview.

http://velocitynation.com/content/interviews/2009/michael-ashenden