The Jambon Report for Stage 16 over at dailypeloton.com is a good one. Locutus makes a good case for all of us fans to continue supporting cycling as a sport, despite the crap that's happened in the last two Tours.
The Jambon Report for Stage 16 over at dailypeloton.com is a good one. Locutus makes a good case for all of us fans to continue supporting cycling as a sport, despite the crap that's happened in the last two Tours.
"How about if we all just try to follow these very simple rules of the road? Drive like the person ahead on the bike is your son/daughter. Ride like the cars are ambulances carrying your loved ones to the emergency room. This should cover everything, unless you are a complete sociopath."
David Desautels, in a letter to velonews.com
Random babblings and some stuff to look at.
So what do you all think of Boonen's suggestion that dopers get a lifetime ban?
"The best rides are the ones where you bite off much more than you can chew, and live through it." ~ Doug Bradbury
Phil Ligget's also suggested that in the past. I think that if they were to go to such an extreme, they'd darned well better get some more reliable test protocols in place. I think the idea of permanently banning someone when there's any question of their innocence would not be right.
"How about if we all just try to follow these very simple rules of the road? Drive like the person ahead on the bike is your son/daughter. Ride like the cars are ambulances carrying your loved ones to the emergency room. This should cover everything, unless you are a complete sociopath."
David Desautels, in a letter to velonews.com
Random babblings and some stuff to look at.
That's a tough one and everyone is going to answer using their own values/morals/justice scale.
[edit- After reading Tam's post I want to preface my answer by saying it takes place in fantasy land and there's no doubt about the validity of lab results]
Part of me wants to say that everyone deserves a second chance and there was pressure from someone in team management to dope. They didn't go to the drug store and ask for a bottle of EPO.
Then there's the part of me that channels Nancy Reagan and says 'just say no". They weren't tied up and injected.
Maybe a "two strikes" rule.
Last edited by Zen; 07-25-2007 at 06:57 PM.
2008 Trek FX 7.2/Terry Cite X
2009 Jamis Aurora/Brooks B-68
2010 Trek FX 7.6 WSD/stock bontrager
I think it's over the top. I think it's *all* over the top, frankly.
I can't imagine having a blood transfusion or taking substances that could kill me to enhance my athletic performance. It just doesn't matter that much to me; I exercise for fun and to be more fit, not to be better than anyone else.
For athletes that are competitive, especially at top levels, any advantage that may increase performance is irresistible to many. I don't think it is unique to cycling, I don't think it's anything new, and I don't think that it's ever going to change, the tactics will just change as existing tactics are discovered/detected.
I have to say that I'm more than a little horrified to see the ends these guys will go to for a small performance increase, and I'm really irritated with the athletes that act horrified at the suggestion of doping when their own records/histories are more than a bit suspect. A good number are probably just ahead of the curve and using a tactic that is not yet on the radar of the people testing.
The near-hysteria over doping in cycling is really interesting to me, because we happily ignore the same epidemic in other sports, and it really isn't anything new. The problem IMO is that we as a society increasingly hold athletes in such high regard, we idolize them and look to them as role models rather than enjoying the sport for what it is, and when we discover that they are not, in fact, super-human, we shun them and discredit their every accomplishment as tainted. We want an exciting race, we reward the 'heroes' of sport with fame and riches and then we act surprised and appalled that they will risk everything for a slight advantage? I'm not saying that I support cheating of any sort, or that races/organizations should tolerate it, but I just don't think it's really that earth-shattering.
Even if we keep the riders in solitary confinement when not racing, close the course of races to spectators and give everyone standard-issue bikes/jerseys/shoes/food, there is no way to prevent someone from finding a way to get an 'unfair' advantage.
I respect Vino for the way he got back on his bike after that crash; that was mental fortitude and a fighting spirit and I don't think that the doping takes away from that. But it galls me to hear him, and others in similar situations, deny the claims and suggest that the science that caught him is flawed in really absurd ways. That's just spineless. He knew what he was signing up for, he took a huge chance and he got caught. I might still have some respect for him if he'd come out and said it that simply.
My two cents.
Anne