I was plagiarized !

So this morning I saw this...

https://www.velonews.com/news/the-outer-line-a-missed-warning-signal/?fbclid=IwAR3TxW0j5PlAYV-dRL3SUhoKpALwcfew9onkbfW18q6UwGKjZmaGbZxffVI

It's a piece about cycling and doping. Nothing too fancy but it makes some good points.

Only thing that bothered me is that it's funded on the study I published some 6 years ago :

https://greglemondfans.wordpress.com/2014/05/03/dark-side-of-the-lake/

Long story short : I had to take over social media and email the publisher in order to get a little credit. They eventually included a link to my story.

Is it common practice or just lazy journalism ?

I think you should be flattered and angry all at the same time!

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

I think you should be flattered and angry all at the same time!

Exactly my reaction.

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

Thank you !

Got a nice message from Greg LeMond's wife too yesterday.

Blood doping killed the sport in many ways :
-It became impossible to identify to the riders, because of their extra terrestrial performances
-Races became boring
-Opportunist nobodies came and went in classifications

It just stopped making sense.

I've always admired Greg on the bike, but the man he is off bike is even greater. Very accessible, down to Earth, decent man. I've never seen him say no to anyone. Interestingly, I interviewed his father Bob once and I asked him what he was the most proud of, regarding his son. I thought he was going to tell about a race or a trophy, but instead of that, he said he's proud that his son treats people so well. It says everything you need to know about him.

Is it common practice or just lazy journalism ?

Hard to say, I'd imagine this kind of stuff happens a lot. Good that you found a solution and defended your copyright.

Quote from: Codeguy on June 17, 2020, 01:48:22 PM

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

Thank you !

Got a nice message from Greg LeMond's wife too yesterday.

Blood doping killed the sport in many ways :
-It became impossible to identify to the riders, because of their extra terrestrial performances
-Races became boring
-Opportunist nobodies came and went in classifications

It just stopped making sense.

Totally agree with this. I loved cycling growing up, and I was a big fan of Ireland's Kelly/Roche era, though I admit that neither would have won grand tours if Lemond hadn't accidentally shot himself.

However, the truth is that nobody can reliably know today who is and who isn't doping, and what other nonsense is going on. It isn't a level playing field. The great endurance tests up Alpe D'Huex, Luz Ardiden, etc, Col du Tourmalet, etc., were gripping to watch.

Out of curiosity, what do you think of Alberto Contador? I am on the fence about him. 

Quote from: Codeguy on June 17, 2020, 01:48:22 PM

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

Thank you !

Got a nice message from Greg LeMond's wife too yesterday.

Blood doping killed the sport in many ways :
-It became impossible to identify to the riders, because of their extra terrestrial performances
-Races became boring
-Opportunist nobodies came and went in classifications

It just stopped making sense.

I've always admired Greg on the bike, but the man he is off bike is even greater. Very accessible, down to Earth, decent man. I've never seen him say no to anyone. Interestingly, I interviewed his father Bob once and I asked him what he was the most proud of, regarding his son. I thought he was going to tell about a race or a trophy, but instead of that, he said he's proud that his son treats people so well. It says everything you need to know about him.

I was a Laurent Fignon fan.  But you got to admire LeMond's final time trial in 1989 TDF.  One of the greatest dramatic sporting moments of my lifetime, along with Dennis Taylor winning the World Snooker Championship in 1985, Man Utd eating Bayern in the Champions League final in 1999, and Jordan Spieth winning the Open at Birkdale in 2017 - because I was there.

As to the issue you had:

It's common and lazy. I used to write for a site called The Daily Grail (paranormal, archaeology, UFOs, science), we regularly had our articles and research used by others with no credit. A "polite" email and most would add credit, but some didn't. Some of the worst offenders literally couldn't grasp the concept of basic common courtesy, let alone intellectual copyright.

Quote from: Soloyan on June 18, 2020, 03:00:38 AM

Quote from: Codeguy on June 17, 2020, 01:48:22 PM

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

Thank you !

Got a nice message from Greg LeMond's wife too yesterday.

Blood doping killed the sport in many ways :
-It became impossible to identify to the riders, because of their extra terrestrial performances
-Races became boring
-Opportunist nobodies came and went in classifications

It just stopped making sense.

Totally agree with this. I loved cycling growing up, and I was a big fan of Ireland's Kelly/Roche era, though I admit that neither would have won grand tours if Lemond hadn't accidentally shot himself.

However, the truth is that nobody can reliably know today who is and who isn't doping, and what other nonsense is going on. It isn't a level playing field. The great endurance tests up Alpe D'Huex, Luz Ardiden, etc, Col du Tourmalet, etc., were gripping to watch.

Out of curiosity, what do you think of Alberto Contador? I am on the fence about him.

I bumped into Sean Kelly a few times. He's funny.

Contador... well, for starters he's been in the worst teams possible, when it comes to doping. He started out with Liberty Seguros (former ONCE team), then Astana (Vinokurov), CSC (Riis), Tinkoff... it's as bad as could be, really.
He was entertaining because he attacked a lot. Didn't shy away from a fight. He got away with doping because he's basically a nice guy, so people give him a break. That's what Armstrong taught dopers, eventually : keep a low profile, don't be an arrogant prick.
People compared the LeMond / Fignon fight of 1989 to the Contador / Schleck fight of 2010 but it doesn't hold water. LeMond and Fignon were in opposition of styles (Greg was defensive, Laurent offensive), whereas in 2010 both riders had exactly the same profile. It was truly boring to watch.

Quote from: Codeguy on June 18, 2020, 01:50:55 PM

Quote from: Soloyan on June 18, 2020, 03:00:38 AM

Quote from: Codeguy on June 17, 2020, 01:48:22 PM

I'd be pissed!!!


I read your article, and you do make some great points. I've always been a big fan of cycling.

It's totally reasonable to think that not all doping is created equal, and that some people have won clean and others dirty. In America, there is the delusion that Lance Armstrong was "just like all the others, why pick on him" - in reality, he was a mediocre cyclist before he got cancer, and he comes back one testicle short, and all of a sudden he can't be beaten? That's an absurdity that can't be explained by "everyone cheats"

Greg Lemond is often forgotten here in the USA, but there is every reason to believe that he won clean while lots of others were doping, and that he is one of the greatest cyclists of all time, denied his place in the history books only by (quite literally) shooting himself in the foot.

Your article is prescient and stands the test of time.

Well done.

Thank you !

Got a nice message from Greg LeMond's wife too yesterday.

Blood doping killed the sport in many ways :
-It became impossible to identify to the riders, because of their extra terrestrial performances
-Races became boring
-Opportunist nobodies came and went in classifications

It just stopped making sense.

Totally agree with this. I loved cycling growing up, and I was a big fan of Ireland's Kelly/Roche era, though I admit that neither would have won grand tours if Lemond hadn't accidentally shot himself.

However, the truth is that nobody can reliably know today who is and who isn't doping, and what other nonsense is going on. It isn't a level playing field. The great endurance tests up Alpe D'Huex, Luz Ardiden, etc, Col du Tourmalet, etc., were gripping to watch.

Out of curiosity, what do you think of Alberto Contador? I am on the fence about him.

I bumped into Sean Kelly a few times. He's funny.

Contador... well, for starters he's been in the worst teams possible, when it comes to doping. He started out with Liberty Seguros (former ONCE team), then Astana (Vinokurov), CSC (Riis), Tinkoff... it's as bad as could be, really.
He was entertaining because he attacked a lot. Didn't shy away from a fight. He got away with doping because he's basically a nice guy, so people give him a break. That's what Armstrong taught dopers, eventually : keep a low profile, don't be an arrogant prick.
People compared the LeMond / Fignon fight of 1989 to the Contador / Schleck fight of 2010 but it doesn't hold water. LeMond and Fignon were in opposition of styles (Greg was defensive, Laurent offensive), whereas in 2010 both riders had exactly the same profile. It was truly boring to watch.

Any of you remember the Chicken in 2007?