Solutions?

- no more former cyclist involved in anything related to doping as directors, consulents, anything, because they have "knowledge"...and we know what kind of "know-how" they have from their careers or contacts with magical-doctors.

Bro Deal said:

With the sport in a shambles, what are people's ideas for solutions to the doping problem? Is there one?

My ideas are:

1) There need to be harsh laws against doctors and other involved in sporting fraud. Although it might seem a trivial thing to spend the state's resources on policing sport, sports are big business and an integral part of modern society's entertainment and leisure time.

2) Close monitoring of athletes using a regular testing schedule that is even more frequent than the French use. Testing would not only check for banned substances but track blood values to detect manipulation. In the ProTour system this could be paid for by each team paying 500.000 euros per year. With 25 athletes and weekly testing that works out to 400 euros per test. Regular drug testing costs about that. I don't know how much additional blood tests costs, but with the large number of tests you would think you could get a bulk discount.

3) The sport cannot police itself. There needs to be an outside organization that is not subject to commercial interests.

I think they need to introduce life bans for drug offences. Riders, officials, managers, everyone. No more mucking around. I saw an article painting David Millar as the ironic hero of this tour as he is returning after a 2 yar ban. Who can believe he is clean?

they could just ignore it like just about every other sporting event does. Including the olympics, american football, baseball, soccer, etc.

azdroptop said:

they could just ignore it like just about every other sporting event does. Including the olympics, american football, baseball, soccer, etc.

Isn't that what they have been doing?

I mean the Spanish Civil Guard took down Fuentes, not UCI / Spanish Federation.

azdroptop said:

they could just ignore it like just about every other sporting event does.

Ah, the Hein Verbruggen plan. I think Leblanc has hopped off that train and Verbruggen has fallen under its wheels.

I stated this nearly three years ago when I joined this site :

(1) The sport of cycling need to adopt the same stance as the sport of rowing : you're caught doping, you're banned for life.
No equivocation. No lessening of sentence.
You dope once - and you're found guilty - you're gone. End of story.

(2) When each professional licence is issued, the rider must sign a sheet of rules containing a stipulation that if he/she is caught doping, that he/she must refund all prize money won throughout ones career, even if he/she has passed doping tests at other races.

(3) That a team who has a rider caught doping must pay a substantial financial penalty because it's rider has broken the rules.

(4) That a rider is suspended immediately when under investigation.

I think these rules, coupled with more rigourous "in competition" and "out of competition" testing and due process would be a start in fighting the dope war.

limerickman said:

I stated this nearly three years ago when I joined this site :

(1) The sport of cycling need to adopt the same stance as the sport of rowing : you're caught doping, you're banned for life.
No equivocation. No lessening of sentence.
You dope once - and you're found guilty - you're gone. End of story.

(2) When each professional licence is issued, the rider must sign a sheet of rules containing a stipulation that if he/she is caught doping, that he/she must refund all prize money won throughout ones career, even if he/she has passed doping tests at other races.

(3) That a team who has a rider caught doping must pay a substantial financial penalty because it's rider has broken the rules.

(4) That a rider is suspended immediately when under investigation.

I think these rules, coupled with more rigourous "in competition" and "out of competition" testing and due process would be a start in fighting the dope war.

These are harsh, but number 2 alone would keep them from doping for sure. Nice list.

1) This one could be ok.

2) They would probably do the trick. However, it is way out of order in terms of the riders' legal protection. They would never be able to eat or drink anything they didnt prepare themselves for fear of contamination either by accident or by setup, and with the consequence of loosing a lifetime of savings. And evidence in doping cases is usually rather vague and based on probabilities, and not slam-dunk admissions, recordings, or eye-witnesses.

3) I don't like this one either. Even the busiest rider probably spends most of his time away from the team. I don't see much that a team can do to discover a rider who wants to dope himself (lets for a moment assume that the team wishes to be clean). So you are either convicting a team on just a possibility that they knew something, or on negligence to find out. The first is just plain bad practice, and the second would require the teams to have a reasonably reliable way to find out. At the moment, I cant think of anything the teams can do that is practically and financially possible.

4) I agree with this one. It just needs to be clear that a formal investigation is required, not just a newspaper research.

azdroptop said:

These are harsh, but number 2 alone would keep them from doping for sure. Nice list.

It is harsh, Az.

Perhaps it is too harsh, my friend.

But given what we now know, I think only a harsh penalty (s) will work.

Just my view.

I like (1), but maybe in some cases a rider is doping unintentionally if he uses a certain medicine and does not know that it's forbidden. But for all kinds of growth hormones, blood doping etc. a lifelond ban would be an excellent improvement.

I heard the UCI demands a 4 year ban for all the cyclists involved. I also agree 2 years are ridiculous, but I think you should set an incentive for confessing. I got a lot of respect for Millar, because he admitted doping although he wasn' tested positive. All these other riders use the denying-strategy. This is what Ulle intends to do now as well. It's probably because he would lose recognition and money, because I think several contracts included punishments for doping.

8 years for doping and not confessing and 5 years for doping, regretting and confessing would be fine in my opinion.

limerickman said:

It is harsh, Az.

Perhaps it is too harsh, my friend.

But given what we now know, I think only a harsh penalty (s) will work.

Just my view.

If they truly do want to clean up the sport than I think you have the answer.

2 years ban IF athlete give names of doctros, dopers, directors who helped him. The problem is not cyclists thenselves, but people around them who have always the good "trick" or the shortest way....
If the doped refuses to give names or is get caught a second time, then, life ban, no matter if he/she gives names.

limerickman said:

I stated this nearly three years ago when I joined this site :

(1) The sport of cycling need to adopt the same stance as the sport of rowing : you're caught doping, you're banned for life.
No equivocation. No lessening of sentence.
You dope once - and you're found guilty - you're gone. End of story.

I agree by 100%. I hope I won't ever see Basso riding again. I will watch this year's TDF. But if some of those riders will race again I will stop watching cycling. I understand that there is legal rules and after 4 years they might be back again and it is horrible they can't make exclusion and ban them forever.

I am giving a second chance to this sport and please drop David Millar out of cycling. I can live with a fact someone is has been cought but I can't live with a fact they are coming back...