Gee, while I was occupied elsewhere I see I missed the main part of the discussion. I also see that discussion has somehow been trolled back toward the age-old topic of whether Lance dopes. Boring. Circle jerk. Hope you don't mind my saying that, but, I mean, really . . . .
It is only very recently that we've demanded our sportsmen compete drug-free, and really meant it. Especially in pro cycling, which is arguably among the most commercial of sports and definitely among the more corrupt. (This doesn't diminish in any way the achievements of its participants; it just makes the sport human.) I'm not sure why we are suddenly so serious about clean sport, but it probably has a lot to do with the current drugs being so effective.
In contrast, the huffing of menthol and camphor, swallowing of strychnine, snorting/shooting of cocaine, smoking of cigarettes, and drinking of coffee and cognac that occurred in cycling prior to World War II just didn't mean that much to the overall outcome (the taking of the train, however, was another matter). Not in the minds of the public, at least.
World War II brought new drugs. Amphetamines were immensely helpful to men engaged in several straight days of combat and marching and in any case the drugs were distributed to all soldiers on all sides. For more than twenty years after the war the drug companies touted their products as being the panacea for every need and desire, both personal and social. This culminated in the sixties drug culture of the "baby boom" generation and the supposed ultimate drug, LSD. It was in this context that cycling existed and you can bet serious competitors were sucking down every drug the team doctors recommended (and probably some they didn't). And this was acceptable, more or less, until Tom Simpson decided to ride on speed and cognac alone and keeled over in the heat, dead.
After that, "respectable society" demanded that cycling make at least the pretense of frowning on drug use, and so the pretense was made. What? Eddy, you naughty boy, you've tested positive for - gasp! - amphetamines. You are banned for the next two weeks! Round up the usual suspects.
The doping continued, though, and so did the drug research and at some point a funny thing happened: really effective drugs were developed/discovered: various steroids, EPO, human growth hormone, and god knows what all. Flax seed oil. You've got your Cream in my Clear. (Not to mention plain ol' blood doping - autologous transfusion - which preceded the effective drugs but probably worked - and works - just as well.)
OK, so now we demand that cyclists compete drug-free - and this time we really mean it! We want cycling to return to a purity of some sort that only ever existed inside some people's heads. Maybe it can be achieved - I'm not saying I wouldn't like to see it - but if such a time comes it will be a first, make no mistake about that.
Meanwhile, sponsors spend millions and expect to see results. Results, for sure, and no scandal. You do the math.
And that's the way it is, January 20, 2010.
And through it all Eddy Merckx is the greatest competitive cyclist who ever lived or likely ever will live, and no drug will change that.
