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
@mouse
This - "but the thought that you can trade off TdF victories doesn't sit right with me" - is exactly what bugs me about the dispute. I know that there is (and must be) an element of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" in cycling. But I still don't think it reflects well on either of them when the back scratching extends to trading TdF victories.
@frank
Sadly Phil no longer sports what was one of the best/worst ponytails in sporting history
Come during our summer - then you can ride with all the pros during their offy - especially Gerro and you can tell him what you really think of him. By the by, would be useful if Gerro starts getting a result or two soon...
@G'phant
Instead of trading victories (or, more accurately, Lemond agreeing to work for Hinault and then vice versa) what was the alternative? Teammates racing against one another? This "trading" you speak of happens EVERY time one teammate agrees to ride for another teammate in a particular race with the expectation that roles will be reversed on another day. To my mind, that is the essence of pro teams and pro cycling...
Truly, one of the greatest TDF wins. Lemond had to ride against his teammate and the majority of his French Team. Well before stage #18,Briançon to Alpe d'Huez, on the first mountain stage #12 Bayonne to Pau, Hinault went away and had close to a 10 minute lead on the road at one time (finished 5 minutes up on the day). Lemond must have thought his chance to win was over. The next day on another mountain stage, Hinault again goes 5 minutes up the road on stage #13 Pau to Superbagnères. On the final climb Hinault blows and the peleton consumes him and Lemond is set free and almost brings back all of Hinault"s lead. I can't imagine what mental hell Lemond went through on those two stages. That had to be the quietest Team dinner table those two nights, in TDF history.
@Marcus
Yes, I hear all that. But wouldn't the better (albeit perhaps less easy to achieve) outcome be either (i) let the road decide (and then the weaker supports the stronger), or (ii) follow team orders?
@minion
Excellent post. Fabulous version.
@Buck Rogers
I was looking for the official Nancy Sinatra version, which is the radness, but couldn't find it pre morning coffee. I'd also like to point out the, erm, toungue in cheek nature of putting the song next to Oli's quote, not wanting anyone to think I was ah, serenading anybody. That WOULD be awkward.
@zalamanda
Dude. La Vie Claire. Google it. We need a Keeper to assign a penalty here, I'm afraid.
@zalamanda
The La Vie Claire jersey colors (red, yellow, blue and gray) were based on the artwork of Dutch painter Piet Mondrian (1872 - 1944). He was famous for his artwork consisting of white backgrounds with painted grids of vertical and horizontal black lines and the three primary colors.
La Vie Claire, a chain of health food shops, was one of many businesses owned at the time by team owner Bernard Tapie. In creating the La Vie Claire jersey team it was a marketing success for the shops as its distinctive design stood out in the peloton.
A similar concept to that of Castorama, the French home improvement chain that Laurant Fignon and Cyrille Guimard signed as sponsor of their team in 1990 after Systeme U finished the previous year. The jersey was designed as a set of workmans overalls. The idea coming from Fignon himself and again considered a marketing success by Castorama at the time.
@Marcus
What a legend Phil is... bad ponytail, bad glasses, bad helmet, badass.