We tend to look at cycling through rose-tinted glasses; cycling-specific ones that not only give us a cheery outlook on the past, but ones that conveniently hold big black bars over the bits we prefer not to remember as they were because they don’t fit into the picture we’ve formed in our minds. One of the most interesting things about a community like Velominati is all the different viewpoints that come together regarding events past that help remind us of something approaching reality, built from an aggregation international of views. Perhaps even more interesting is how this experience also brings into sharp relief the evolution of the “facts” as we each have seen them at different points in our lives.
A prime example is of the discussion earlier this week regarding the Lenault battle in 1986. The American view predominantly held was that LeMond was short-changed by Hinault, while the Europeans (or at least the French) could see no reason Hinault should acquiesce the Tour should he be in a position to win it. Certainly not from an American. The Aussies, of course, feel Phil Anderson or, barring that, Phil Ligget or someone else named Phil – regardless of nationality – should have won it, and the Kiwis are no doubt still busy looking for a Tour contender who doesn’t ride a bike. At the time, I hated Hinault and characterized him as a cheating douchenozzle; these days, I regard him as one of the greatest examples of a complete rider and a model of what riders today should aspire to be.
The truth is, of course, somewhere in the middle and after we boil the ocean of the ’86 Tour, we’re left with two great riders on one team who were so closely matched they each could have won that year. But the promises made the year before and the reality of the race situation on the road were like water and oil, and by the time the race reached l’Alpe d’Huez, the team, the fans, and the countries had polarized towards one end or the other, each choosing the side that matched most closely the version of the facts that helped them feel more at ease with their loyalties.
As controversies have a tendency to, they overshadow one of the most unique rides to the top of l’Alpe d’Huez in the history of the great climb. In my memory, Hinault attacked on the descent from either the Col de la Croix de Fer or the Glandon. (Maybe he attacked at the base, as WikiPedia suggests, but I don’t remember it that way.) Only LeMond had an answer, and the teammates escaped together to ride the mythical 21 hairpins together. I can’t think of another time when two G.C. riders – let alone two teammates – outclassed everyone else in the race up this climb.
Up and up they rode together – the Badger in his distinct style and LeMan in his – with only their pain, their massive gears, their rocking shoulders, and their resentment for each other as company. Hand-in-hand they crossed the finish line as happy team mates, LeMond gifting the stage to his patron in the end. But beneath the surface boiled a fearsome rivalry and within minutes Hinault and LeMond’s dashing alter-ego, LeMelvis, traded blows in the press. And with that, the great ride was almost immediately eclipsed by polemics.
In the end, LeMond overcame a tampered-with TT bike to win the Tour and Hinault retired as arguably the most successful Tour de France rider at the time. The record is set but the facts become more malleable with time. The rest we see with our rose-tinted glasses.
I know as well as any of you that I've been checked out lately, kind…
Peter Sagan has undergone quite the transformation over the years; starting as a brash and…
The Women's road race has to be my favorite one-day road race after Paris-Roubaix and…
Holy fuckballs. I've never been this late ever on a VSP. I mean, I've missed…
This week we are currently in is the most boring week of the year. After…
I have memories of my life before Cycling, but as the years wear slowly on…
View Comments
Why did Hinault attack on the way to Superbagneres? He already had the yellow jersey and it was hardly his style to make colossal fuck ups like that.
"As long as I breathe, I attack." - Bernard Hinault
(pass the popcorn please)
R E S T E C ... P I believe is the exact quote from Ali G.
He said that, but still he wasn't renowned for futile attacks (1984 Alpe d'Huez notwithstanding)...
I think the truth is somewhere in the middle of Hinault's hubris and LeMond's paranoia.
@Oli
I feel like I read something like that somewhere...OH. RIGHT.
Joking aside, that's what's so cool about the different nationalities...everyone has another view.
The climb up l'Alpe in '84...what a day...Have any of you read Robert Millar's account in Rouleur? Fantastic, fantastic, fantastic.
@Oli
In seriousness, though, his attack in '84 was, I think, part arrogant determination and part hail-mary to overthrow Fignon. I think it was the same up Awesomebagneres. My favorite climb ever, by the way.
But I said it better. :p
I have nothing but respect for LeMan the younger. However (and this is a bit OT), isn't LeMond the current kinda akin to Vegas Elvis? Has this been discussed before, and I can be pointed to that thread? Or have I just committed blasphemy (like highjacking centuries)?
OK Frank - you asked for Phil Anderson (very obliquely, but you did), you get him (once again). Excerpt from an article written by Rupert Guiness about Anderson's duel with Hinault in the '81 Tour. Bolding mine - and you need to imagine Phil's quotes in your best 'Strine accent:
It was even worse when Anderson just sat on his wheel - still hoping for news of Bernaudeau (his teammate) who had been long dropped - until Peugeot directeur-sportif Maurice De Muer told him he could work 'a bit' at the front.
"It was just as well, as Hinault was going off his block," said Anderson, who had four other riders with him in the front group: Van Impe, Belgian Claude Criquelion, and the Spanish pair of Marino Lejarreta and Alberto Fernandez. Without knowing it, Anderson was to earn even greater wrath from Hinault by naively offering him a swill from his bidon (drink bottle). The Frenchman, taking the gesture as an insult, promptly swiped it from Anderson's hand.
"I didn't even know who Hinault was. I couldn't even pronounce his name. But I was there with him and when I gave him my bidon. I was only trying to be sportsmanlike. I figured something was really up when he hit it away. I suppose I should have been intimidated by it all, but I wasn't. Heck, I was Australian and couldn't even spell Hinault, let alone know who he was," says Anderson.
Still our coolest Australian cyclist. Phil can often be seen riding around Melbourne. And often you might pass him - rest assured he still looks in super shape (still races MTBs) and could rip your legs off. But he doesn't. So fellas think about that next time you think you are "handing out the V" to some stranger you pass on the road. Odds are he probably doesn't give a fuck about you...
Uncanny.
I watched this last night whilst avoiding study.
Hinault's logic of "I was helping" makes sense subjectively. As the caption on youtube for the video above states (rough guesswork with the french, sorry Alpin): Zimmerman, 5 minutes back, everyone else, heaps more. From Hinault's point of view, he went and blew up the tour for Greg, laying waste to any GC pretenders. Now should LeMond be unable to take advantage of this assistance, that was hardly his problem, no? Regardless of the sulkfest to follow, that euphoric gesture as they crossed the line seems more genuine than any recent Schleck-Contador mutual appreciation image development. Huge stage, huge tour.