So dissapointed

[Roadrunner]

I am so dissapointed with the "proffesional" cyclists especially Lance Armstrong of whom I've alway been a big fan an supporter. Is there any end to the doping saga??
What annoys me most is that all the honest "Clean" cyclists out there didn't stand a chance.
How many more sponsers is the sport going to lose through this. Rabobank has now pulled out, which is a big blow to the sport.
If only some sponsers would do the same as the Sky team and make the riders sign an anti-doping pledge.

Enough of my ranting. What are your views on all of this?

[snapdragen]

I don't believe any professional cyclist rides clean.

[Irulan]

I don't believe any professional cyclist rides clean.

I have figured Lance et all have been guilty as charged for years. The whole thing is absolutely no surprise to me.

[ny biker]

I don't believe any professional cyclist rides clean.

+1

And I don't particularly care anymore.

[lovelygamer]

I don't believe any professional cyclist rides clean.

I second this statement and its a VERY SAD state of affairs for young and new cyclists.

[lovelygamer]

Ditto.

It would be nice if the sport were clean. So much better for all the athletes. But I don't believe singling out one very successful individual is the answer.

I agree with this too. They had a serious vendetta against Armstrong.

[smilingcat]

don't forget the olympics, Wimbledon, NY and Boston Marathon... There will always be cheaters at all aspect of our lives and its not just in sports. Another reason why we need to get away from culture of hero worshiping.

[Eden]

Some degree of cheating is as much a tradition of the tour as the yellow jersey is ...... The forms have varied over the years, from outright sabotages like spreading tacks on the road to sneaking rides to drugs of all forms (way back when the top choice was amphetamines). To expect completely clean sport is naive, wishful thinking. To think that even if somehow all cheating could be magically eliminated that there would be a level playing field is also naive. Some poeple will have access to better equipment, better training, better coaching etc. and some are simply born more gifted. Hard work and peseverence may get you farther than gifted laziness, but it will only take you so far.

[Tri Girl]

Another reason why we need to get away from culture of hero worshiping.

+1,000,000

[Koronin]

+1

And I don't particularly care anymore.

This is also my feeling on it.

[macski]

I am heartbroken about the revelations (particlularly about Lance) although for the past 12 to 18 months I have been anticipating this outcome. Prior to that I had been clinging to a naive hope.

Unlike others, I do believe that some current pro riders are clean. Perhaps it is my Australian bias but I believe that Cadel Evans (amongst others) is a clean rider and that if he had been doping he might have won those two tours where he came second. He is one of the people that you can see suffering on the bike.

[pll]

I am not particularly disappointed. I was never a fan of Armstrong (as I have mentioned several times in this forum) and actually disliked his arrogance. For so many years, there were allegations and rumors around him and his teams.

At any rate, I will continue to be a fan of the sport. It is a beautiful sport and I watch the grand tours and classics in part because of the scenery. I have never idolized any athlete (or anyone else), so this mess leaves me shaking my head. It is sad to see sponsors leaving the sport at a point where the European teams need it the most because of the Euro zone crisis.

[bluebug32]

I love to ride and race my bike and this will never change. I prefer to watch women's racing if/when it's televised and I enjoy the men's as much for the scenery as the sport. It sucks to have cycling's reputation tarnished by all of this, but I also realize that the more pressure we place on our athlete's as spectators and sponsors, the more they will be driven to such extremes. IMO, Lance is a separate case. The man is a sociopath, a bully, a cheater and a chronic liar. He would be toxic in any environment.

[limewave]

I saw this craigslist posting (http://grandrapids.craigslist.org/bik/3348258402.html) and it made me really sad. I wanted to believe Lance, I really, really did. Sigh.

In other, somewhat related news, did anyone go see The Levi Effect (http://www.levieffect.com/) last night? There was a showing not too far from us but I couldn't get a babysitter. I'm hoping to either buy the DVD or download it when it becomes available.

I haven't watched the Tour for a few years now, it just seems so fake to me. And I've been hearing rumblings of local racers doping! Seriously! Is it that big of a deal to win an AG?????? I have been slowly distancing myself from the race scene. I still do xc mtb races and I really enjoy them, but I don't care as much about how I place. Racing is really changing for me--its not a motivational tool to keep and build fitness and to live a healthy lifestyle.

[Giulianna23]

but I also realize that the more pressure we place on our athlete's as spectators and sponsors, the more they will be driven to such extremes. IMO

Agree with bluebug32



BTW...I had the chance to go watch this movie this past Monday, but couldn't make it http://risingfromashesthemovie.com/ sounds very interesting and encouraging.

[mumbles]

I think they all worked hard to get where they are and any edge they can get, they will take. If everyone else at the top is doping, then you are gonna do it to. Not saying that is right, but is likely the way it is.

[e3rdpower]

I second this statement and its a VERY SAD state of affairs for young and new cyclists.

Far from just cycling. Football, baseball, hockey, pretty much every sport. Hell, even classical musicians have been known to use beta blockers to calm down prior to big performances. I'd bet that happens in golf also.

[Jo-n-NY]

As far as I am concerned it was a level playing field back the then. Most all of them were doing it. And I agree pressure from whoever geared them to it. I also feel that the intense testing that is done in cycling is not as intense as it is in other sports. If it was I don't think cycling would be the "fall" sport for doping.

Was it right to go that route, no, but it is what was done in that era of time by almost all. The resources that was available could not detect it. I am sure 10yrs from now we will be even further in detecting drugs in the system. The problem I have is that what happened then happened and now testing is advanced so move forward. Bring down the guys that are testing positive. Do I believe Lance doped, most probably but there is no positive test so why ban him for life. Not one athlete that I know of has been given this type of punishment. If he tested postitive he would have received a 2 year suspension. It has nothing to so with liking him or not, it has to do with what is just. Unless they all are banned for life then this sentence posed upon Lance is not right. But that is just my opinion.

I saw the Levi Effect last night and really enjoyed it. It was nice to see a more personal side of him along with his wife Odessa. I did not realize how much they both give back to the community & to underpriviledged kids. He did touch on the subject of doping without pointing fingers to anyone else involved. It gave me a better understanding of what it was like back then and why whoever chose that route did. I am not condoning it & neither did Levi, just gave a perspective from the other side of the coin.

[luvmyguys]

I think they all worked hard to get where they are and any edge they can get, they will take. If everyone else at the top is doping, then you are gonna do it to. Not saying that is right, but is likely the way it is.

Interesting perspective on the US Postal doctor from Scott Mercier (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/16/sport/tennis/armstrong-mercier-us-postal-cycling/index.html), the guy who quit when he was given all the steroids. This article is similar to the other one posted on TE, but his take on the doctor is worth reading.


Far from just cycling. Football, baseball, hockey, pretty much every sport. Hell, even classical musicians have been known to use beta blockers to calm down prior to big performances. I'd bet that happens in golf also.

Even students are intentionally taking Adderall and other ADHD meds in order to give them increased focus on their SAT and other high-stakes testing.

[goldfinch]

As far as I am concerned it was a level playing field back the then. Most all of them were doing it. .

Not really a level playing field because good people dropped out of the sport because they did not want to do the doping.

Also, people react differently to the types of drugs given so even if everyone doped some had more of an advantage than others.

FWIW.

[Eden]

Not really a level playing field because good people dropped out of the sport because they did not want to do the doping.

Also, people react differently to the types of drugs given so even if everyone doped some had more of an advantage than others.

FWIW.

And some people's bodies react differently to training.... or are they are just born different - with more lung capacity, bigger hearts, the ability to build muscle, tolerance to lactic acid etc. etc..... There is no such thing as a level playing field period. We all have to play the cards that we are dealt. Some people get a crap hand in the first place, others have to work extra hard to play what they get and the lucky ones just receive an ace in the hole on the deal. If it were level we'd all start out with the same potential, but that just isn't so and never will be

It's not a justification to cheat. Sports have rules because without them they would cease to be measurable contests, but on the other hand having a "level playing field" isn't a good argument for determining exactly what should be allowed and what should be banned, as it is a fiction in the first place... We revere these people because they are extraordinary, because they can do things that we couldn't equal in our wildest dreams (I could cheat as much as possible and I probably wouldn't be able to out ride a completely clean Lance Armstrong on an adult tricycle with a load of bricks in the basket....). If we could all achieve the same, we wouldn't be interested in them.

[Catrin]

+100 on what Eden said. Starting with genetics there really isn't a true even playing field so this really isn't a good argument against doping - or at least not the only argument against it. That being said, someone probably won't be able reach that level of competition unless they have some genetic dice rolls in their favor to begin with - so leaving out the performance enhancing drugs does help to even things out.

Eden I love your analogy - I KNOW I couldn't out-ride Lance in those conditions, indeed I probably couldn't even keep up with him...

[Possegal]

Eden I love your analogy - I KNOW I couldn't out-ride Lance in those conditions, indeed I probably couldn't even keep up with him...

I raced against him a couple weeks ago. He passed me. Twice. :) (not wanting to get into the discussion really, just had to drop that in there). :)

[lph]

I completely get what Eden is saying about there not being a level playing field in the first place, but that doesn't discredit the idea in any way to me. It's about leveling the field as much as possible. As much as reasonably possible. And all the argument goes on within the definition of "reasonable". So what goes into a fantastic performance? Genetics, culture, opportunity, support, (time, money) training, determination, nutrition, good medical care for injuries, drugs... You can't do anything about genetics. Elite level sports is partly about showing off a nations culture and attitude to sports, so as much as we could wish for poor athletes to be given the same opportunities as the ones from rich countries, it's not going to happen. Money and time and support and opportunity is always going to be unevenly distributed. So what is reasonable when it comes to nutrition, medical care and drugs? Where do you draw the lines between normal healthy nutrition and medical care, which is "performance-enhancing" compared to poorer nutrition, and what is not acceptable? I have no idea. That's why we have to have set guidelines I guess, where drug A is an accepted supplement, and drug B is banned, and everyone just has to comply whether they agree or not.

I don't really have any strong opinions on this. Only that once the guidelines are there, willfully breaking them is obviously cheating. What I get out of the whole mess is just a strong feeling that it's a long time since elite level athletes really were good ideals. I am still inspired by some of them, but I can't imagine really living their lives. They live like astronauts, in a bubble that I have no wish to share with them. The athletes I truly look up to are people I can identify with, people who have jobs or are parents, who live somewhat normal, balanced lives and still manage to perform well.

[pll]

I think it is important not to loose track that doping in Armstrong's teams seems to have been organized, pervasive. I am sure there were/are many dopers in the professional peloton, but what makes US Postal so insidious was the level of organization and research effort to avoid detection that went into "the program". And the pressure put on team riders to dope... The worst kind of "team effort" conceivable.

[Bike Writer]

+1,000,000

Right there with ya Tri Girl!

[BikeDutchess]

Maybe I'm naive, but I may have rediscovered a new hero. Or if hero is too strong a word, a cyclist worthy of my admiration.
Jens Voight on Doping: 'I Just Did Not Ever Dope' (http://bicycling.com/blogs/hardlyserious/2012/10/30/turbulent-times/)