Tour de France 2016

I've already posted this in two other threads, but there's a lot in this interview with LeMond, including this on Froome:

LeMond expressed doubts about Froome’s high-cadence attacking style in the L’Equipe interview.

“He turned his legs at a high speed, but it’s not effective and contrary to all physiological laws,” LeMond is reported as saying, also dismissing the idea of Team Sky’s marginal gains philosophy.

“You can’t get a gap on small gears,” LeMond argued.

“The great physiologist Frederick Portoleau showed that when Froome accelerates hard, his heart only shows small variations. This is troubling. What bothers me is hearing some technicians say it's science fiction, which is a kind of misinformation. Others make us believe they are ahead of the best scientists, the famous Team Sky marginal gains! What bollocks! There are no new methodologies. That is wrong. In this area too, miracles do not exist.”

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/greg-lemond-miracles-in-cycling-still-dont-exist/

I do wonder whether quoting Dr Portaloo is enough to justify this claim.

'There are no new methodologies' may go a bit far and actually doesn't help his claim that there are no miracles. Why should it not be possible to gain a small advantage in this way? While 'marginal gain' is undoubtedly marketing spin, a new methodology as such does not mean a miracle. Froome's time gains from these attacks have been quite small and the biggest has come from the TT, as the article itself acknowledges.

I think LeMond is great, but this makes him sound as if stuck in the past a little (which I realise is not news, and for which he has a good deal of justification, although he did act on motorised doping early on).