Spanish Drug Policy Changing

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by B Lafferty, Feb 13, 2005.

  1. Bob Schwartz

    Bob Schwartz Guest

    Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
    > 2. If we don't address it we are going to end up alienating sponsors
    > who really are trying to sell this as a sport that encourages good
    > health and fitness.


    Steroids did not damage football. On the contrary enhanced the aspects
    of the game that were the most attractive to fans.

    Steroids have not damaged baseball. Oh sure, people are hacked off about
    Barry Bonds and the rest of the new crop of home run bashing hulks. But
    those people are not showing up at the ballpark anyway, so who cares.
    The guy in the stands likes home run bashing hulks.

    Poor labor relations have damaged baseball far more than drugs ever will.

    Women's tennis used to be the domain of baseline lobbers. Now it's
    dominated by muscular chicks playing the power game. And fans love it.

    Cycling has endured repeated drug scandals. From Tom Simpson, to Merckx
    at the Giro, to a red handed Pollentier at Alpe d'Huez, to early heart
    attacks, to Festina. All this time it has only grown in popularity.

    People groove on watching incredible athletes doing incredible things.

    I you really want to make an impact on doping in the sport, the very
    first thing to do is get enough of a grip on reality to form
    reasonable expectations of the results of any efforts. That way you
    don't end up a nutcase like Decanio.

    Bob Schwartz
    [email protected]
     


  2. amit

    amit Guest

    Bob Schwartz wrote:
    > Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > 2. If we don't address it we are going to end up alienating

    sponsors
    > > who really are trying to sell this as a sport that encourages good
    > > health and fitness.

    >
    > Steroids did not damage football. On the contrary enhanced the

    aspects
    > of the game that were the most attractive to fans.
    > ....
    > People groove on watching incredible athletes doing incredible

    things.

    yes, the average fan doesn't give a shit about doping and most assume
    it is rampant. but, it does affect the sponsorship. that is why pro
    sports (NFL< MLB) work so hard to maintain a professional image, even
    though the fans like the non-professional things (fighting in hockey,
    on field celebrations in football).

    > That way you
    > don't end up a nutcase like Decanio.


    decanio, like 90% of people (including myself at times) doesn't see
    what he has, he sees what he doesn't have. he has the talent to be a
    top pro racing clean, but even if he was making $100,000 he'd be pissed
    there were guys making $500,000.
     
  3. Bill C

    Bill C Guest

    I agree with you that there are some huge problems with the procedures
    and the people conducting them. The horor stories about government and
    police labs just keep coming. The fact that there is no independent
    oversight and that they investigate themselves is suspect at best. As
    for the penalties I have no problem with removing someone from the
    sport if the process is fixed and made much more open. Everyone keeps
    screaming that this is taking away their means of making a living.
    Bullshit 99.9% of the planet makes a living doing something other than
    bike racing they can too. What it does is remove them from a system
    they have chosen to seperate themselves from by their own actions. :ike
    I've said before, we need to really look at the coaches and doctors
    too, maybe even more than the riders, because if they are forcing
    people to dope to stay with the team and be supported, which has been
    alleged, they need to be run out of the sport forever. Period.
    Yeah, there is not going to be any way to clean up the mess that isn't
    going to hurt the sport somewhat. It's like surgery, you have to
    ibflict some pain now for the long term good.
    To be fair I jumped your shit, when you really don't deserve it. My
    apologies.
    Bill C
     
  4. Bill C

    Bill C Guest

    Bob Schwartz wrote:
    > Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > I get really tired of the argument that just because something

    can't
    > > be made 100% we shouldn't try to do anything about it. This seems

    to be
    > > a recurring that some people keep trumpeting. Let's just ignore it,

    and
    > > rationalize it away. That's a sad ass excuse for people who usually
    > > claim to care too. They are so paralyzed by their own fear of

    getting
    > > dirty while doing something that they are willing to stand by and

    do
    > > nothing while applauding themselves for staying clean.
    > > Nothing is ever 100% successful, but in a lot of cases even a 10%
    > > improvement is better than doing nothing.
    > > Bill C

    >
    > As someone that has jousted with you on this, I just want to state

    that
    > I do not hold the position that we should do nothing because nothing
    > can be done. My position is that the return for a serious anti-doping
    > effort in cycling does not justify the cost of that effort.

    Especially
    > when you consider alternative uses for those resources.
    >
    > I believe that's Henry's view as well.
    >
    > Bob Schwartz
    > [email protected]


    Henry keeps trying to equate cycling and it's situation with life in
    general. I don't think that we need to be spending any resources
    outside of the sporting community on this. That we agree on. I think
    that we do need to do the best we can with the resources inside the
    sport itself, and since it's an Olympic event within the international
    anti-doping agencies.
    The only place that I would involve outside police agencies would be
    in cases of serious legal violations, such as smuggling, organized
    doping rings that had Drs. breaking laws etc..
    Unfortunately cyclings real resources are shrinking due to rising
    costs for all the regular things, let alone dealing with doping so it's
    going to be a real mess very soon unless something changes, especially
    with insurance costs skyrocketing across the board for everybody.
    Bill C
     
  5. Bill C

    Bill C Guest

    Bob Schwartz wrote:
    > Bill C <[email protected]> wrote:
    > > 2. If we don't address it we are going to end up alienating

    sponsors
    > > who really are trying to sell this as a sport that encourages good
    > > health and fitness.

    >
    > Steroids did not damage football. On the contrary enhanced the

    aspects
    > of the game that were the most attractive to fans.
    >
    > Steroids have not damaged baseball. Oh sure, people are hacked off

    about
    > Barry Bonds and the rest of the new crop of home run bashing hulks.

    But
    > those people are not showing up at the ballpark anyway, so who cares.
    > The guy in the stands likes home run bashing hulks.
    >
    > Poor labor relations have damaged baseball far more than drugs ever

    will.
    >
    > Women's tennis used to be the domain of baseline lobbers. Now it's
    > dominated by muscular chicks playing the power game. And fans love

    it.
    >
    > Cycling has endured repeated drug scandals. From Tom Simpson, to

    Merckx
    > at the Giro, to a red handed Pollentier at Alpe d'Huez, to early

    heart
    > attacks, to Festina. All this time it has only grown in popularity.
    >
    > People groove on watching incredible athletes doing incredible

    things.
    >
    > I you really want to make an impact on doping in the sport, the very
    > first thing to do is get enough of a grip on reality to form
    > reasonable expectations of the results of any efforts. That way you
    > don't end up a nutcase like Decanio.
    >
    > Bob Schwartz
    > [email protected]


    Cycling may be a big enough part of the culture and have enough of a
    fan base to survive all of the crap in Europe. I don't think it
    survives here where selling sponsorship is already pretty tough if we
    let doping roll and people start dropping dead. Bodybuilding took a
    huge hit and lost a lot of mainstream sponsorship when Paul Dillet, who
    was a front runer for the Mr. Olympia cramped up solid and had to be
    carried off stage due to the duiertics he was hammering. What do you
    think the response will be to a rider with blood like molasses in
    January dropping dead of a heart attack right in the middle of the SFGP
    right in front of all the cameras? That's pretty much inevitable if we
    just decide to ignore doping.
    All of the big sports have more than enough support because people
    have played them, watched them, or at least understand them and they
    are accessible to everyone. Cycling is a niche sport that depends on
    community goodwill for the facilities and roads we use. If there is no
    good PR to be had from hosting cycling here then it's not going to keep
    happening.
    The hardcore fan doesn't care, and we would always find someplace to
    race, but the sport becomes even more of a footnote than it is now if
    we decide that it's not worth the trouble to fight doping.
    Bill C
     
  6. Curtis L. Russell wrote:
    > On 14 Feb 2005 10:40:03 -0800, "Kurgan Gringioni"
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >Let me repeat: if you were really interested in saving lives, you'd
    > >start with alcohol and nicotine

    >
    > I think its the tars that kill them - the nicotine just keeps pulling
    > back people that should know better...




    Dumbass -

    Following that half-assed logic, when someone takes way too much EPO,
    it's their own red blood cells killing them, not the act of shooting
    too much EPO.

    Evil red blood cells! Evil!

    K. Gringioni.
     
  7. On 14 Feb 2005 13:55:54 -0800, "Kurgan Gringioni"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >Evil red blood cells! Evil!


    I'm convinced. My wife and I will be opening up an office to bleed off
    those nasty blood cells for the dopers. We'll charge the dopers for
    the bleeding and then sell what we get to the Red Cross. And whenever
    I feel like it's all a bit underhanded, I'll sell my client list to
    WADA to cleanse my consience. Plan to retire on the book sales, as
    soon as I write the book.

    Curtis L. Russell
    Odenton, MD (USA)
    Just someone on two wheels...
     
  8. amit

    amit Guest

    Bill C wrote:

    > So you are planning to found the widows and orphans fund that Brian

    has
    > talked about? What about compensation for teenagers who die die to

    drug
    > cocktails their coaches feed them looking for the next Campionissimo?


    dumbass,

    decanio talks about his recreactional drug use, apparently that doesn't
    bother him as much as doping. he and ian stuart feel like they were
    cheated out of their rightful glory and cash. or at least free inner
    tubes and a 15% discount on all repairs in the case of stuart.

    they don't really care about the "kids", because kids have bigger
    problems than doping in cycling.

    -Amit
     
  9. Donald Munro

    Donald Munro Guest

    Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
    >>Evil red blood cells! Evil!


    Curtis L. Russell wrote:
    > I'm convinced. My wife and I will be opening up an office to bleed off
    > those nasty blood cells for the dopers. We'll charge the dopers for
    > the bleeding and then sell what we get to the Red Cross.


    How much will you be charging for some Armstrong or Ullrich blood, and
    will you be supplying a free labrador as an incentive to buy in bulk ?
     
  10. On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:36:41 +0200, Donald Munro
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >How much will you be charging for some Armstrong or Ullrich blood, and
    >will you be supplying a free labrador as an incentive to buy in bulk ?


    I'm working on the business plan now. I might go with Scotties - I
    think Labradors are a virtual Tyler trademark now.

    Curtis L. Russell
    Odenton, MD (USA)
    Just someone on two wheels...
     
  11. h squared

    h squared Guest

    "Curtis L. Russell" wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 11:36:41 +0200, Donald Munro
    > <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >How much will you be charging for some Armstrong or Ullrich blood, and
    > >will you be supplying a free labrador as an incentive to buy in bulk ?

    >
    > I'm working on the business plan now. I might go with Scotties - I
    > think Labradors are a virtual Tyler trademark now.


    ok, i had to miss a few weeks of posts, and i'm still suffering from
    flu-pidity, so excuse me if i'm missing some pun-

    but tugboat was a golden retriever, not a labrador retriever.
    (not that it really matters to most, but if it's going to reach the
    level of a virtual trademark, then i'm going to say something :)
    h
     
Loading...
Loading...