posted Jul 20, 2007

It's even simpler if you delete, "depended on how clean cycling was, and for some reason your wages".

Got my analogies mixed.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

The main problem is identifying and defining prohibited drug levels. Almost all physlogically active drugs or closely associated chemicals exist naturally at some level in the body. This is a specialist area for pharmacists. Athletes have been taking food/drug supplements since the Greeks. However much we wish it aint so athletes will forever battle to help themselves win in any way they feel they can and all sporting authorities can do is try and keep on top of the problem.
At least, hopefully, following from the debacle a couple of years ago the cycling world has been forced to tackle this problem seriously and should be applauded for that. But if you want to see a clean sport then dont look at professional athletes, just participate!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

Get caught face the consequences, But how can this be Testostrone? Boll-cks, We take the ruling body as gospel? Then you are the ones on something... Cyclists are naturally sexy sitting on their little post for 5 hours and wearing Lycra,sporty glasses and all. Why don't the Rolling stones ride bikes then? Eh? No suggestions intended guys, but stop the ... Oh my goodness, it won't do the sports image any good attitude. Check out the BBC website and you'll find the Cycling link under snooker and next to disabilty sports. Great advertising, keep up the good work. Now, where's my Lanolin.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

Cycling has been and still IS riddled with drugs, thats the problem.

At least couple of positives every tour for the last 10 years is a terrible record.


Verzino, you try to push it under the carpet by saying there are 200 riders comapred to only 8 in an athletics race. I'm sure that even you know that is rubbish.

Athletics has a major championship every year at least (olympic, commonwealth, world) in which many hundreds of athletes compete accross races ranging from 100m (usually around 60 competitors, dont just count the final) to marathon (over 100 competitors in some) and then there are the field events as well.

If there were a similar ratio of positives to cmpetitors then we would have to expect up to 10-15 positiive tests on athletes during each championship, which just does not happen.

Cycling has admitted it has a problem, but until it starts to get really tough on drug cheats (making them pay back their last 2 years wages and any prize money for the last 4 years as well as a lifetime ban and their names erased from any record books would be a start). As it happens T-Mobile are one of the better teams for checking but all teams should be required to have a drug/wellness policy like this as a minimum.

Every rider should be tested in the days prior to the tour, with daily tests for the top 20 finishers and 5 of the top 20 in all classifications. This is the only way to clean up it's image.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 20, 2007

I read in a triathlon magazine years ago that there was a 7:1 "rule of thumb" ratio between cycling miles and running miles. Over the 20 stages of this years Tour, that averages out at running about 15.7 miles per day at race pace over some pretty severe terrain in demanding weather conditions. As an ex-marathon runner (2:30 best time) I don't think there's many runners on this planet who could manage that level of performance day-in, day-out with only the "traditional" pre-race high Carbohydrate diet and limited recovery time. I feel sure these tour cyclists are on some form of "performance boosters" (legal or otherwise, knowingly taken or otherwise) and at the end of the day, the pressure they are put under by team managers / sponsors or whoever to deliver day after day or lose a handsome salary has seen them turn a "blind eye" to the morals of it all...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

I remember reading an article in the mid 80's about Sean Yates eating 10 of those choclate bars, the ones named after a planet. Could these contain illegal substances? He used to do some excellent times.... I thought so. Did they have drugs then as well, no wonder I couldn't get anywhere hear his times. The point I am making is you are beginning to become alarmists... Drawing a conclusion without real evidence. I still don't see how Testosterone makes you go faster... Oh Dave Lloyd beat me too. He was an Ex-pro. Raleigh team I think. Name and address supplied.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

The phrase I remember from Willy Voet's book about the Festina affair was 'masking'.The
pharmacists supplying the 'pepped up'riders
can no doubt mask anything,maybe in particular testosterone; maybe the mistake Landis is alleged to have made was to panic - he wanted a quick fix on the final mountain stage and the 'mask' slipped.
There are always whispers about certain riders being 'on'something : the French are still trying to prove that Armstrong's performances were more than human.Maybe there should be separate races, one for chemical enhancement: a jersey for best chemist.
Don't agree with Brown Bottle's assessment of pro bike racing against marathon running.If you notice the way much of the stage races stagger themselves - some of the early stages
were run at a fast club run,then the pace quickens when breakaways are collected.The mountain stages are rarely attacked from the start to the finish.Even Armstrong used his team to create a pace that burned off the opposition before he made his final push.
There have always been great rolleurs - men like Taffi and Agostinho -sprinters and climbers, the mix that makes the great Tours the events they are.Despite the drug outbursts I continue to follow the TDF as the great event it is: the landscape, the French countryside,rivers and mountains are never drugged (maybe as good as a drug), and surpass anything created by cyclists, chemists, sponsors or the whole rigmarole.
May not be the best place to add this, but what about the Danish cycling association and Rasmussen.Someone in the Danish org doesn't like Rasmussen being in yellow ?

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

alfbinda,
There's also slipstreaming. Also, often forgotten, coasting; when you stop running, you stop; when you stop pedalling, you can roll quite a distance.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jul 21, 2007

Alex,

Not the half-baked critical analysis they teach for writing essays, the kind they use in logic.

Men’s pro cycling has got very little credibility; meaning it’s very naive to follow it without wondering if riders are still cheating the dope controls. That is true whatever goes on in other sports.

On a credibility scale of 0 to 100, where 0 is no credibility and 100 is pure as the driven snow, I would rate men’s pro cycling about 10. Maybe 5, maybe 15, but definitely not very high. Sport X has a credibility rating of 8 or 9; sport Y has a credibility rating of 13 or 14; sport Z has a credibility rating somewhere between 2 and 30. If you like arguing about which sport is the worst, and quibbling over insignificant differences between them, you go and enjoy yourself.

Right now, I am following bike racing; I am only interested in how credible bike races are, and not whether they are slightly more or less credible than other sports. I do not want to argue about which sport has got the least credibility, and I do not want to join-in with a name calling contest. And I will thank you in advance for not trying to drag me into either one or both.

Does that make my position clear? I do not think it is a difficult position to grasp, nor an unreasonable one. I think it’s legitimate criticism, and not merely fault-finding. Can you explain why you are so attached to calling it ‘picking on cycling’?

You carry on calling it 'picking on cycling', and I shall continue to think cycling is scraping the bottom of the barrel if its defence has sunk to “It’s not fair, other sports are just as bad”. That manner of complaint belongs to whining 10 year olds destined for Brat Camp. I can do far better than that, and I think cycling fans can do themselves a favour: stop squabbling like playground crybabies, and respond to criticism like grown ups instead.

add comment | complain about this comment