Well that was lame or no Contador, no Tour



serpico7

New Member
Sep 18, 2006
217
0
0
Crankyfeet said:
If doping is allowed... It will be in the juniors...the Cat 4 races on the weekends...etc...etc... Soon there will be a dope that makes you unbeatable.... but may kill you. Do we reward the winner who is prepared to take the risk?
Too late (at least in the US) - read Cutting Edge Muscle forums - even guys in CAT 5 are taking stuff, talking about how to monitor hematocrit to make sure it stays below dangerous levels, etc. Talk to any high school kid involved in team sports - football, wrestling, hockey, etc - lots of kids are taking PEDs.

Lots of professions are dangerous. Coal mining, boxing, military, etc.

Look, I take your point about the dangers of PEDs (though I could argue that the dangers are greatest when the stuff is forced underground), but if the playing field is going to be so skewed, with some guys doped to the gills and others relatively clean, what's the point of pro sports? Let's say some of the GC contenders were only lightly doped (e.g., Evans, Valverde, Cunego); they show up and are ridden to exhaustion by Team Discovery errr . . . I mean CSC. The more things (supposedly) change in this sport, the more they stay the same. Maybe it's time to change the model.
 

Crankyfeet

New Member
Jun 5, 2007
10,817
0
36
serpico7 said:
Too late (at least in the US) - read Cutting Edge Muscle forums - even guys in CAT 5 are taking stuff, talking about how to monitor hematocrit to make sure it stays below dangerous levels, etc. Talk to any high school kid involved in team sports - football, wrestling, hockey, etc - lots of kids are taking PEDs.

Lots of professions are dangerous. Coal mining, boxing, military, etc.

Look, I take your point about the dangers of PEDs (though I could argue that the dangers are greatest when the stuff is forced underground), but if the playing field is going to be so skewed, with some guys doped to the gills and others relatively clean, what's the point of pro sports? Let's say some of the GC contenders were only lightly doped (e.g., Evans, Valverde, Cunego); they show up and are ridden to exhaustion by Team Discovery errr . . . I mean CSC. The more things (supposedly) change in this sport, the more they stay the same. Maybe it's time to change the model.
I've been arguing on your side of the road before. I even used the analogy of professionalism in sport. Forty years ago...professionals were regarded as cheats in a lot of sports... especially the Olympics. Nowadays it is just accepted and allowed. I proffered that doping may be just the same. That our aversion to it may be just an historic mindset...and that if it was brought out into the open... it would be a lot easier to monitor it and be made safe.

The problem is that doping is slightly different to being a professional (ie training full-time instead of after your day-job). It changes ones physiology. It wouldn't be an even playing field... in that the emphasis would be on new dope that gave one an advantage. And it would lead to "wonder" drugs/methods that would greatly increase short term performance at the expense of long term health.

Would you want to watch a TdF where a Stefan Schumacher suddenly starts winning mountain stages by 5 minutes because he has some new wonder drug the others haven't got. Something that gives him a 50% chance of dying in the next five years. As your 16 cyclist son watches on TV and says... "Dad...I got to get some of that... even if it does cost $100,000 a year.... we're rich.... we can afford it... and I'll win."
 

serpico7

New Member
Sep 18, 2006
217
0
0
Crankyfeet said:
I've been arguing on your side of the road before. I even used the analogy of professionalism in sport. Forty years ago...professionals were regarded as cheats in a lot of sports... especially the Olympics. Nowadays it is just accepted and allowed. I proffered that doping may be just the same. That our aversion to it may be just an historic mindset...and that if it was brought out into the open... it would be a lot easier to monitor it and be made safe.

The problem is that doping is slightly different to being a professional (ie training full-time instead of after your day-job). It changes ones physiology. It wouldn't be an even playing field... in that the emphasis would be on new dope that gave one an advantage. And it would lead to "wonder" drugs/methods that would greatly increase short term performance at the expense of long term health.

Would you want to watch a TdF where a Stefan Schumacher suddenly starts winning mountain stages by 5 minutes because he has some new wonder drug the others haven't got. Something that gives him a 50% chance of dying in the next five years. As your 16 cyclist son watches on TV and says... "Dad...I got to get some of that... even if it does cost $100,000 a year.... we're rich.... we can afford it... and I'll win."
As you point out, the biggest concern is the effect on children. But with all the doping in pro sports and the advent of the internet, that cat is already out of the bag. Teenage boys can tell you loads about various PEDs, costs, dosages, cycle lengths, etc. Does bringing it up from the underground make it much worse? Maybe the Dutch members here can tell us if there is rampant abuse of legalized drugs by children?
 

Leafer

New Member
Apr 11, 2006
317
0
0
rodsteiger said:
That has to be the most boring Tour on record. Just freaking brutal.

Evans has to take a lot of blame as to why this dog and pony show was unwatchable. The man has no killing spirit at all. He just pedals merrily along waiting to win. No guts, no yellow jersey baby.

Contador would have made this thing rock! :cool:

But no, on sheer hearsay they kept him out.

Well chuckleheads, you got what you wanted! The lamest Tour ever. Hope you're satisfied.

And to all you drones who go on and on about doping. You're bigger losers than Evans.

See you next year, perhaps when the Tour decides to put a real man in the group! Viva Contador! :D
Sadly, after a decade of Armstrong and Landis and now Contador, there's a whole new generation of cycling fans who think that the Tour is boring if one of Bruyneel's dopers doesn't win.
 

limerickman

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2004
16,130
220
63
serpico7 said:
As you point out, the biggest concern is the effect on children. But with all the doping in pro sports............................


Use of language here, is interesting.

What does "all the doping in pro sports" mean?
Do you mean that all competitors are doped?
Or are you suggesting that the majority of competitors in pr sports are doped?

As an aside, with all of the scandals that have occurred in cycling, my belief in banning cheats for life is ultimately the only real deterrent to prevent riders from choosing to dope, has become stronger.
Giving these guys a two year ban isn't a sufficient enough deterrent in my view.
 

serpico7

New Member
Sep 18, 2006
217
0
0
limerickman said:
Use of language here, is interesting.

What does "all the doping in pro sports" mean?
Do you mean that all competitors are doped?
Or are you suggesting that the majority of competitors in pr sports are doped?
Not all, but many competitors in many pro sports are doping. American football, world football, baseball (the "leaded" coffee pots have speed in them), olympic track and field, olympic swimming, etc.
 

rodsteiger

New Member
Jan 16, 2008
8
0
0
Leafer said:
Sadly, after a decade of Armstrong and Landis and now Contador, there's a whole new generation of cycling fans who think that the Tour is boring if one of Bruyneel's dopers doesn't win.
Dude, look up over your head and make a whooshing sound.

That's you missing the point of the post.

Had nothing to do with LA, FL. I'm not going to explain it to you. Clearly other people got it. It's all there in the OP. Read it again, you'll get it. :D