Tour de France 1986 Stage 21 Greg Lemond Interview

[sprintbass]

the french always loved a 2nd...they loved hinault more for his 2nd in 84 than they did his other no1's..lemond proved himself..if your a cyclist long enough have raced for years on end and looked at the route and the results it was lemonds race.also he had 89 and 90...i grew up during those years.i still follow cycling but garryclarkesoliciter comments below are right..there was alot more heart and tears and emotion back then..and thats what i miss most...people figting thier soul and guts out

[garryclarkesolicitor]

It was a different world where cyclists open their hearts to the media in a way we would never see now. You can argue for either of them but between them they made the 1986 tour one of the best races in the last three decades.

[gdkzen]

It's difficult to watch that interview at the end, but one has to remind oneself of the context. The interviewer seems to be very biased towards Hinault, but many of his more pointed jabs come in response to rhetorical questions from LeMond. The journalist did not have as strong a grasp of English as he thought. One thing is very interesting however.  The interviewer seems to agree that the contreversy would not have happened if LeMond had been allowed to ride his own race in 1985.

[snailmartyr]

Either it doesn't matter, in which case couldn't Lemond have ridden at the front for *some* of that long climb? Or it does matter... in which case when Lemond put his arm across Hinault's shoulder and says he thanked Hinault, that makes sense. Lemond wanted to win... he won... and he never stopped complaining. Hinault wanted to win... he didn't... and he didn't complain once. Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault all had egos that were ultimately satisfied; Lemond's ego wasn't, hence the constant carping.

[snailmartyr]

The World According to Lemond: Anything that reflects poorly on Lemond is always someone else's fault (i.e. following the wheel of Zimmermann... that was Kochli's fault); anything that reflects well on Lemond is always due to himself. Talk about a limited range of affection... it's not the fact that he sat wheels during this Tour that is so galling. It's that he refuses to own up to the fact that he sat wheels in order to win this Tour. Even Isaac Newton had to stand on the shoulders of Giants.

[ta1920]

@snailmartyr Does it really matter if your sitting on someone's wheel when the gradient is 10 percent? (like on the Grannon) Greg was the most consistent, both in the time trials and in the mountains, he never blew like Zimmermann did on the Alpe, or Hinault on the Grannon, he consistently finished in the top 2 or 3 places of every critical stage, he was a deserving winner, Hinault raced that year to satisfy his ego, Greg raced to win.

[snailmartyr]

I always thought of Lemond as a great bicycle racer; Hinault as a great cycling champion. In this interview, Lemond says that Hinault didn't help him on the climb up L'Alpe D'Huez... yet in his interview following that stage, he was asked what he said to Hinault as they approached the summit and Lemond said that he 'thanked' Hinault... for what?

[sjl62]

The fact is, though, that Lemond raced extremely conservatively throughout his career -- following wheels and saving energy instead of putting in bid audacious attacks. It's hard to say whether he could have actually won races the way that Hinault did.

[celticdaze]

I know my cycling history, i don't need lesson.Lemond was not better than Hinault in 1985, that was a myth produced by the American network to generate interest in the tour. Hinault was completely in charge until he suffered his crash at St Etienne. In 86 if he really wanted to win the tour he could have wheel sucked and kept his 5 min advantage, it just wasn't in his nature. He wanted Lemond to show some attacking spirit, which he eventually did and yes Lemond was the strongest rider in 86.

[celticdaze]

He never won a classic or a Grand tour other than the tour de france. 4th in Paris Roubaix, you really are scraping the barrell with that. 3rd in the Giro, come on Hinault won that 3 times doubling up with a Tour De France victory twice. I'm not saying Lemond was not a very good cyclist, just not a great one. You've kind of my made my argument for me.

[ta1920]

@celticdaze No, i just corrected you because you don't seem to know much about cycling history. How can you call any rider who won 3 Tours, 2 Worlds, 1 Dauphine, 2 Coors Classics (which back in the day was a very demanding and prestigious race) 1 Tour L'Avenir and countless other top 3 finishes in both the classics and grand tours merely "very good"?

Also, no one is comparing Lemond's body of work to Hinault's, still doesn't change the fact that Greg was the better Tour rider in '85 and '86

[celticdaze]

Lemond, a great cyclist but a world class whinger. He was always a follower never a leader; he didn't make the most of his talent. He also benefited from the injuries Fignon suffered in those years; he was never quite as good as Fignon in the Grand Tours.

[ta1920]

@celticdaze @celticdaze WTH? "Follower"? Who cares how you win, if you show panache or not, all that matters is who is wearing the yellow jersey in Paris. Lemond was better than Fignon, Fignon (RIP) was eternally injured and his time trialing blowed after 1984, in the mountains he only was slightly superior to Greg in 1989, when Greg was still coming back to full strength after his hunting accident. If Lemond was a "follower" than Fignon was a "quitter"..

[celticdaze]

@ta1920Lemond was a Follower then Fignon a quitter? What does that mean? Lemond was a very good cyclist but not a great one. He never for instance won (or came close to winning) a Monument Classic or any of the other Grand tours. Fignon won the Giro and of course Milan San remo in consecutive years a true sign of class. If you compare his record to Hinault's he pales in comparison even more, it's a fact no argument. You can coulda, woulda and shoulda all day long but it's results that count.

[ta1920]

@celticdaze wow, learn something about cycling history before spouting off. You say Lemond never came close to winning a cycling monument, how about his 2nd in Lombardy in 1983? His 4th in Paris Roubaix in 1985? His 3rd in Liege in 1984? What about the two World Championships he won where Fignon never even reached the podium? What about his 3rd in the 1985 Giro? I guess you just glossed over all these results, huh?

[snyperkyzer]

believe me, it was anti english speaking bigotry in the peloton is an understatement! an factm Hinault was never a friend of LEMOND..nor a real teammate...people in the know, knew Lemond was the strongest rider on the last few tours! (teach Lemond how too win.....wut a joke!)

[gdkzen]

Great video. The interview gives you an authentic taste of what LeMond was dealing with up to the last stage. When it could not be denied that LeMond was the strongest rider, the French press turned to his "lack of panache" as a reason that he should be denied victory. LeMond really broke a big barrier that year, not just in becoming the first non-European champion - but putting a nail in the coffin of the anti-english speaking bigotry in the peloton.