Talk:Greg LeMond

Pronunciation

A recent edit claims the name "should be pronounced like the fruit rather than in French". I'm surprised, since I recall sportscasters calling him "luh-MOND" and not "LEHMM-ind" (capitals for emphasized syllable, but a bad attempt at phoentics, sorry). Anyways, if someone can confirm this fact, I've pasted together what I believe the IPA phoentic spelling for the name would be (based on that of "lemon"). IPA: [ˈlemənd]. (If pronunciation is going to be specified, phoenetics is a more absolute method, rather than by comparison to another word.) --Ds13 23:30, 2005 Apr 14 (UTC)

That edit was from a detractor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.184.15.5 (talk) 17:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Galibier, Télégraphe AND Alpe d'Huez?

I've been sprucing up this article--I'm a big fan of LeMond--but I got stuck on sentence from an earlier contributor that refers to "...a stage that included the brutal climbs of the Col du Galibier, the Col du Télégraphe and the Alpe d'Huez..." I know that the Galibier and the Télégraphe are contiguous, but the Alpe d'Huez can't be in the same stage, can it? It's too far away for one thing, and no human being could do all three climbs, for another. I'm deleting the reference to the Alpe d'Huez for now. Can anyone advise? BitQuirky 21:08, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They are in fact very close, and tour riders do 3 such climbs per stage on a regular basis. see: http://www.cyclingnews.com/road/2003/tour03/?id=stages/stage8 Dwyatt 101 16:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC). The July 22, 2011 stage included all three climbs.

There's even an cyclosportive called La Marmotte which climbs these cols plus Croix de Fer in just 1 day. Yeah its tough, but is not impossible (I did it anyway, along with tousands others back in 2005) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.83.55.140 (talk) 23:14, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

More info on doping

Could someone more knowledeable about cycling than myself expand on doping in cycling and LeMond? I read an interview a few years back where he said that he was forced out of the sport prematurely by the new wave of dopers, and that he refused to partake in it as every other pro rider started doing.

While he did retire just as EPO usage was really starting to explode, his stated reason for retiring was his mitochondrial myopathy, and its hard to see him competing sucessfully with such a condition 83.245.24.88 19:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

This is a complicated issue. Certainly his medical condition was a key factor in his retirement. It's also true that in the last few years of competition he had a hard time getting good results. The big question is whether LeMond was slowing down because of his condition, or whether the rest of the peloton was dramatically speeding up. It's certainly possible that it was both. Clearly doping was becoming more prevalent in the 1990's, particularly EPO. An edition of "Fearless" on OLN (now Versus) contains some dialogue from LeMond on this. In that program, he remarked that the peloton got noticeably faster, and that riders who were formerly average pros were suddenly much stronger. As more and more doping admissions continue to emerge, eventually we may see that many riders in the early 1990's were under the influence of banned substances. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.180.220.61 (talk) 23:05, July 16, 2007

That is true, but he also said that it might have just been his impression - that when he was struggling he couldn't help but wonder how it was that other riders were going faster, as any frustrated person might wonder. I believe his comments show his ability to look objectively at his own psyche. Certainly no one touched his time trial time from the final stage of the 1989 Tour for many years. At his best, he most definitely was capable of riding as fast as any rider of the nineties, and could do so on consecutive days. Gunbirddriver (talk) 21:21, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Personal Life

Someone should add a section for LeMond's personal life. I have a relation to his son and that could present a conflict of interest. However, this stilll should be added. 76.109.187.138 18:42, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Done - finally... joepa^T 20:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Competition with Hinault

The article tends towards POV when it talks about the 1985 and particularly the 1986 TdF. It si claimed that "It was clear that Hinault was riding aggressively against his teammate" and that he "cracked". Without proper reference, such language should not be part of a encyclopaedia entry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 134.226.32.57 (talk) 14:24, June 5, 2007

And such comments should be signed ;) Severo^TC 15:43, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I believe that problem is corrected now. Hinault did crack and was dropped by the leading group, allowing separation. "Cracking" is a cycling term for being unable to keep the pace. They will also say a rider fatiguing is "on the rivet", and when he cannot keep the pace will say he's "popped". It does not imply mental breakdown. Greg was able to attack the remaining leaders and opened up a time gap that put him in the lead. He watched Hinault carefully throughout the rest of the race, feeling Hinault would attack again if the opportunity presented itself, and believing his French team's management would not discourage such an attack. Gunbirddriver (talk) 08:28, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

1. Numbered list item

Mitochondrial myopathy

"Infection: The Uninvited Universe", by Gerald N. Calahan, PhD, mentions mitochondrial myopathy ended his career. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.66.55.24 (talk) 19:25, June 24, 2007

In the January 2008 issue of Procycling, Lemond says he believes he never had the illness, that his symptoms were caused by overtraining. I have added that to the text Les woodland (talk) 20:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)les woodland

I saw that. In an interview he gave to the Irish Times Greg reported being evaluated at the Mayo clinic, and they felt that heavy training resulted in a catabolic cycle that caused the lead in the pellets to leach into his system, making him ill. He said he avoids over training now. Provided the reference on the page. Gunbirddriver (talk) 08:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Personal section

I also think there should be a section added pertaining to Lemond's personal life. I notice that there is no references to his father, who was a halfway decent cyclist in his own right. He finished top 10 in the Coors Classic one year, if memory serves. I think the dad's name is Bob Lemond (not the dead guy I got when I did a search on wiki.)

Greg Lemond published an autobiography sometime during the 90s, which would make a good reference, if anyone could find a copy of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.30.196.29 (talk) 05:07, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I agree - there's a reference under the Floyd Landis section about LeMond having suffered childhood abuse, but nothing in the article. Details would be useful? 94.174.108.74 (talk) 15:05, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

There is now a mention of this in the article - that LeMond is a victim of sexual abuse (along w/ ADHD, btw) - and details on the fact that he and his wife are both on the board of directors of the 1in6 charity. This information is sourced and the references include quotes that expand on the molestation revelations, so a reader following them will have access to the full story. Take a look at it and let us know what you think, if it's substantial enough or what. joepa^T 20:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Classing the article : up to B-class. How to get to A-class?

Seems to me this is a B-class article already... Haven't read it closely enough to help it move up the ranks... but it doesn't look far off. What might be the to do list? --Smilo Don (talk) 05:53, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Palmares

The article text correctly credits LeMond with winning the UCI Junior World Championship men's road race in 1979. However, the list of LeMond's palmares at the bottom of the page instead credits LeMond with winning the U23 championship. These are two different races based upon two different age cutoffs. Peirce's Signs (talk) 16:14, 1 June 2009 (UTC) I made the correction to the main page but someone may want to check to make sure I have done so correctly. Peirce's Signs (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Racing Career

The sentence "LeMond was a standout junior rider and quickly established himself as a talent." has some grammatical issues. I'll leave it to the rest of you to figure out what it should say. --Thumb10.40 (talk) 06:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thumb, don't leave it to "us", just fix it! Anyway, I believe I already have. Nevertheless I am struck that the article on one of the greatest cyclists the United States has ever produced has spent so little time on his racing career and so much on his post career issues with Trek, Armstrong and Landis. It wasn't that long ago. Surely we can find some archived source information and bring those days of racing back to life. Gunbirddriver (talk) 21:13, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Coggan's Dispute of Vayer/LeMond's Contador/Verbier claims

I have amended the article to include the inherent contradiction in Andrew Coggan's dispute of LeMond/Vayer's claims regarding Contador's Verbier performance. Unless it can somehow be demonstrated that it does not contradict Coggan's claims, it should remain, and I will continue to edit it. Spanish for shark (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Racing Career

I believe the section on his career should be broken up into smaller segments Gunbirddriver (talk) 08:20, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

I concur!! ;) joepa^T 19:07, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Good Article (GA) status - what's needed?

I'd like to see a discussion started to determine what is required for this article to reach GA-status. One can review the Cycling Project quality scale for basic info on the characteristics pertaining to each article class, but let's identify exactly what's necessary for improving LeMond's article. As a subject matter expert, I'm happy to contribute to this effort, if there are other editors with an interest in the topic willing to assist... joepa^T 20:50, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

• more pictures.
• there is nothing in the article about his early life. where'd he grow up? what was school like? when did he start racing?
• the 'other activities' section is too "list of stuff"-ish. it could be written to have a better flow, with more details about other activities, like the speeches he has given such as "Drugs are killing cycling".
• his French article has some interesting stuff + pics fr:Greg_LeMond. Id also note that the French article has a slightly different list of 'teams' (equipes) than the English version does.
• His comments about the 2012 USADA fallout would be useful as well.
• there is nothing about his personal life. married? kids? most 'good' biographies will briefly mention these types of things.
• the 'end of career' section needs more wiki links
• the entire 'lance armstrong' and 'floyd landis' sections need to be shortened, made more efficient, cleaner, and more concise. the long quotes, as they stand, are possibly copyright violations, and besides that, they are not bracketed by quotation marks. but most of all, the casual reader cannot tell the 'jist' of what happened by skimming.. instead there is a massive wall of text and counter text. and its not really clear that ultimately, Greg was proven correct.
• it might be possible to shorten the 'lemond cycles international' section, and somehow stop it from repeating information from the 'lance armstrong' section. i think it would also be useful to talk about LCI before the Armstrong thing - IIRC Trek said that they were a very profitable business division in the late 1990s. Also it would be good to note the LCI 'brands' ultimate fate, briefly, and how LeMond sells branded exercise equipment. Of course, reorganizing all of this is a bit difficult since armstrong, trek, and LCI are all bound together
• shorten the alberto contador section. make it clear what the controversy is about from the get go, dont drag me through numbers and vo2/max things without explaining to me where the paragraph is going in the first sentence or two.
• in general, something feels 'off' about having an entire section devoted to feuds. it seems like there should be some other way to organize this stuff, but im just not sure what it is.

im not an expert on any of this, dont know a lick about cycling, but the above list are things that strike me from looking at the thing. i really wouldn't feel comfortable editing unless i had read a book or two about LeMond (which i havent and probably wont), to get a 'birds eye view' before delving into a big edit. Decora (talk) 00:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Decora, especially on the amount of space devoted to various feuds with other cyclists about doping in cycling. As to pictures, they are rather hard to come by. It would be great to get pictures in of Greg competing, but WikiCommons doesn't have them. Those that can be found on the web are copyrighted by the photographer.Gunbirddriver (talk) 08:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

this is great feedback guys, and Decora, thanks for sharing your views as a "non-expert," since in that way you're not affected by any bias and can comment on it more from the non-LeMond-sepcialist's perspective. I also agree w/ the comments re. the "feuds" and walls of text. ("in general, something feels 'off' about having an entire section devoted to feuds. it seems like there should be some other way to organize this stuff, but im just not sure what it is." There is as much that needs to come out of the article as might need to go in. And w/ respect to the feuds, I would think their place in the article should be minor, relatively speaking, or at least proportional to content pertaining to his actually racing career. I haven't looked at the dates, but it seems like what probably happened is that material was being added while the subject was current and extremely topical.

What's the appropriate process for pulling stuff out and making these reductive edits? Can someone just start doing them, or does it have to be discussed and approved first, or...? Also, re. photographs, if someone w/ an eye for this suggests specifically what kind of photo(s) would be appropriate, I can reach out to Greg and ask if he himself has rights to any that he could release. But I've also had luck in the past w/ other articles in simply contacting the photo copyright holder (when they're non-professionals, ie, not Graham Watson, for ex.) and asking them if they will release the photo(s) into public domain. So if flickr is trolled, for ex., and there are some good LeMond shots there, it wouldn't hurt to ask the copyright holder if they'd contribute it to the wikipedia article.

Lastly, how does one track the effort to get to GA-status? Is it just something we'd keep a list of here on the talk page? Cheers. Oh, and I guess I'll start by proposing that the sections Anti-doping stance and controversy perhaps be made into its own article, so that the focus of this article can be on LeMond the person, and not the feuds that LeMond the person had w/ other notables. Cheers. joepa^T 19:47, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

There are six major critieria listed on the "Good Article" page:

1. Well-written.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable.

3. Broad in its coverage.

4. Neutral.

5. Stable.

6. Illustrated, if possible with images.

As to the process of editing an article, it would depend on how "well-defended" an article might be. An article that has a lot of watchers and where opinions run high would merit discussing major edits on the talk page before making the change. The Greg LeMond article has 39 editors that have listed it as an article they watch, which is not an imposing number of watchers. I would think the only areas that might incite high opinion would be on the doping allegations, charges, counter charges and so forth. Oh, and perhaps also the 1986 Tour and teammate Bernard Hinault. I think the thing to do would be for us to just begin to edit the article, and if we bump into something that other editors have strong feelings on we would attempt to resolve it here on the article's talk page.

Once we get the article closer we would nominate it for good article status. Currently there is a very long back log of articles waiting to be reviewed. A reviewer would then look the article over and either accept it or make suggestions for what is needed to make it meet criteria. I would prefer to spruce up the article before troubling a reviewer to look at it. Once reviewed the process does not end. Even if the article does not qualify we will have been given ideas as to where the article needs to improve. We then would have opportunity to fix the problems and submit it again. It's all a process. As to photos, there are a lot out there. It would be great if you could get some released and added to Wikicommons for the article. Here are a couple of web pages with great photos from his career:

from the 1989 Tour: http://freeflite.com/articles/new-lemond-alpe-dhuez-pg423.htm

from the 1990 Tour: http://fotos.rennrad-news.de/p/180660

and there are lots more. If you could talk to some of these magazine potographers and get a photo released or talk to Greg and get a few released that would be the cat's meow. This is great! I look forward to this project.Gunbirddriver (talk) 02:49, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

yup, sounds good. I had a few mins now and have done some editing to include info on LeMond's charitable/volunteer work (all appropriately sourced, of course). I also added a section for personal life and other activities, but I'm thinking about replacing that with a section on his business interests and then consolidated the material that wouldn't go there w/ the personal interests section. I also added mention in the intro about family, volunteer work and his being an entrepreneur. Oh, I also in the body included info about LeMond Fitness, Inc., which is different than the LeMond Cycles that Trek was involved with earlier... joepa^T 20:20, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greg_LeMond#Anti-doping_stance_and_controversy, should a separate article be created out of this, and just a summary left on LeMond's page, or is it not worth a separate article, and the info here should just be radically pared down? joepa^T 21:03, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

I believe it should be it's own article, as it is a significant topic in its own right, and is too much for the bibliography page on LeMond. Taking it out and making it its own article will require a request for feedback on the question. I've seen it done but have never initiated the process. I'll see if I can find out how that is best done. Looks good so far. Gunbirddriver (talk) 21:31, 27 November 2012 (UTC)~

An editor has directed me to this section on Wikipedia:Splitting. We could list the article in Category:Articles to be split and an editor could split it if it seems reasonable, and discussion amongst editors supports the move. We would leave a small summary and a redirect to the new page for the split out seciton on Anti-doping stance and doping controversies.Gunbirddriver (talk) 18:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Just a heads up, I think the Alberto Contador article may actually have GA-status or otherwise be rated highly ("Alberto Contador has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria"). It might be helpful to look there for an example of successful composition and editing when the subject is a pro cyclist. I can't wait til we have something like this going on here on this talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alberto_Contador#GA_Review joepa^T 19:13, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Splitting out section on Anti-doping and doping controversies

It has been suggested that this section be split into it's own page. The section is rather long, nearly as long as the rest of the biography of Greg LeMond. It is also an area of high contention, and is not stable, as new information seems to be coming out monthly. I find that it distracts from the main purpose of the page and is a topic of enough material to warrant its own page. I support making a split of the article.Gunbirddriver (talk) 18:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the idea of splitting that content and creating a new article out of it, and just summarizing it here in the main LeMond bio. While a summary certainly fits into LeMond's main entry, as it stands now, the length of that section is disproportionate relative to the rest of the material that must be effectively covered in a biography of a living person and is contentious enough (and evolving) to merit coverage via a unique, separate article. joepa^T 18:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

We are currently at 68.5 kilobytes of content, with some biographical information about his days growing up still to be added. The article is a tad long as it stands, which also argues for splitting out the doping controversies section. Gunbirddriver (talk) 18:15, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Well I think we're in agreement on this, though of course it will take some effort to effectively summarize what we intend to split off into a new article. I don't know if anyone else is interested, so I'd say we've got consensus, pending the appearance of some other editors with an interest in this. joepa^T 18:29, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Joe, could you go ahead and make an attempt at the summary paragraph and place it here for now. I am going to try to see how to get an administrator to review the idea of splitting the article, and help us accomplish it if approved. Thanks. Gunbirddriver (talk) 19:51, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I will as soon as I can get to it, which I unfortunately don't think will be today - I've had some high-priority non-wikipedia stuff come up in my normal daily life that I have to resolve asap. :( joepa^T 20:31, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with the proposal. Unfortunately, I cannot contribute to the summary but I will try to review it once done. Anurag Garg (talk) 18:58, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

Call for PHOTOS

Anyone with good quality photos of LeMond (to which they hold copyright) that would be suitable for inclusion in this article is encouraged to make them available via the WikiMedia Commons. Thanks. joepa^T 05:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

I spoke with two photographers tonight who agreed to share pics of LeMond, but there is room for a significant number of images given Greg's extraordinary career and the breadth and scope of his accomplishments. I'll add the new pics as soon as I see that they're available.joepa^T 05:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Very good!Gunbirddriver (talk) 17:59, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Added one of them - a group shot from the 1991 Giro d'Italia - to the corresponding section of his race career. Although it's not a solo shot, I think it's still valuable and illustrative of his relative status in the peloton at that point, given that Fignon is climbing w/ him in the same group! (along w/ Cipollini!! which could certainly be a jumping off point for a discussion about when EPO arrived in the Giro d'Italia! Anyway, also waiting on a nice solo shot of Greg climbing while seated in the Tour, and another pic of him cornering during a stage of the Coors Classic in San Francisco.joepa^T 20:00, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

That photo helps a lot, Joe. Now if we could just get one of the man himself, up close and flying along... Gunbirddriver (talk) 22:39, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks - and I'm working on the kind of photo you suggest - a solo shot. I have a commitment from someone to upload a shot of Greg climbing. If they don't upload it soon, as long as their release-license is correct, I'll pull it out of flickr and upload it myself on their behalf. Also, I edited the caption and note that you yourself edited for that photo, and just wanted to let you know why: unfortunately, in that picture Greg is not climbing "at the front of the peloton," which, on a big mountain stage to Sestriere in the Giro, is very different than what he was actually doing - climbing towards the front of the "laughing group" or the "autobus" - the last group on the road, typically containing sprinters and flatlanders (in this case represented by Mario Cipollini and Franco Ballerini). It is surprising to see a former Giro winner with him, however (Fignon had won in 1989), but now we know that EPO was entering the peloton at that time and skewing results and affecting performances on the road, and that neither LeMond nor Fignon partook in that bit of special medicine. Thanks for all the hard work you've been putting in. joepa^T 00:06, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

Hey guys, I was able to add one of the aforementioned photos, a shot of LeMond from the 1986 Coors Classic. I included it in the appropriate chronological career subsection, but let me know what you think about the exact positioning and the photo caption. Thanks to the photographer for agreeing to make this available to us and for cropping the original print!! joepa^T 21:51, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

This is the shot from the 1989 TdF final TT in B&W http://www.flickr.com/photos/bw94/2927911618/ that I'm waiting for permission on to be able to add to the article. I spoke w/ the photographer yesterday and he committed to making the photo available under a compatible license, so hopefully it will go into the article soon. And I'll work on that summary paragraph ASAP. I'm so slammed I won't even be able to ride tonight! joepa^T 21:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)