BikeCzar
Posts:53
 |
| 07/24/2013 02:02 PM |
|
The list is meaningless. Just more fodder for the blood thirsty throngs of self-righteousness. They were all on peds, in all pro-sports. I don't need a partial list to tell me that. Common sense will do just fine.
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/vaughters-on-senate-report-the-findings-are-more-important-than-the-names |
|
|
|
|
BikeCzar
Posts:53
|
| 07/24/2013 02:20 PM |
|
Here's a list of those using peds in the 1998 Tour. I hope it helps everyone sleep better.
http://tinyurl.com/k8hlelb
|
|
|
|
|
jrt1045
Posts:363
|
| 07/24/2013 02:45 PM |
|
It's great to see that 1998 was just as magical as 2006 as far as getting off the sauce
http://velonews.competitor.com/2013/07/news/ogrady-durand-admit-to-epo-use_296840
Czar, I have to politely disagree. After taking us for idiots for many years they deserve the indignation and disappointment of cycling fans everywhere. If it makes them feel awkward, tough |
|
|
|
|
jookey
Posts:197
|
| 07/24/2013 02:54 PM |
|
| I just find it odd that we strip some guys from titles and let others skate. All I want is consistency when truth comes out. |
|
|
|
|
jookey
Posts:197
|
| 07/24/2013 03:01 PM |
|
| CK, sorry, I missed Julich's name. Ogrady was suspicious and came clean. Will Julich follow suit. If he does, I expect a full 180 on stripping 1-2-3 and awarding it to the fourth place finisher. None other than (drum roll)... France's own Christophe Rinero!!! At last a French winner of LeTour! Viva la France. |
|
|
|
|
stronz
Posts:447
|
| 07/24/2013 03:39 PM |
|
pretty sure Julich already came clean last year. Remember he left sky? was it? and came out with mea culpa
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/exclusive-bobby-julich-doping-confession
|
|
|
|
|
jmdirt
Posts:775
|
| 07/24/2013 03:45 PM |
|
Many motor sports have different levels of modification: ie: stock, super-stock, mod, unlimited, etc. Maybe cycling could do that instead of pro, pro-conti, conti, etc. The grand tours would be unlimited, load up and hope not to blow up.
I've said it before so sorry for the repeat, I enjoy watching NFL games and know that ~70 of them are on something but I don't care. Since I'm passionate about cycling I have always wanted them to be clean (er)...I think I'm over that. Plus, the hippocracy is like religion. Most of the guys bitchen about doper pros are 40+ with more testo in their system than an 18 year old boy. |
|
|
|
|
BikeCzar
Posts:53
|
| 07/24/2013 09:10 PM |
|
@jrt1045 - problem is, it's not a complete list. Only a fraction of the riders from '98 were tested and some of those who were, were tested after the police raids and hotel searches which most certainly slowed the ravenous consumption of illegal drugs. Therefore, the list gives a false conception that some were clean who actually weren't.
The list is, IMO, meaningless. The solutions that come of the discussion may not be. |
|
|
|
|
longslowdistance
Posts:2881
|
| 07/24/2013 11:56 PM |
|
1. Back to the original tread question: How far back to vacate Tour winners due to doping? A: Indurain's fist win. Why? Because doping before EPO wasn't particularly effective and was very widely used, so LeMond and prior get a pass. (I assume autotransfusion wasn't used in the Tour, maybe niaive?). Purists squawks away, I don't care. I don't see the world in black and white. "Nuance." Look it up.
|
|
|
|
|
79pmooney
Posts:3180
|
| 07/25/2013 02:00 AM |
|
lsd, I agree. The huge change is that before EPO, riders were limited to what their bodies could do. Painkillers and stimulants meant that riders could get closer to their ultimate limit and do it for longer, but that limit didn't change. (Well it did some from more intense drug fueled training.) But EPO changed the fundamental game. Now those limits were pushed to places that were previously unobtainable.
Ben |
|
|
|
|
Keith Richards
Posts:781
|
| 07/25/2013 10:04 AM |
|
| Cheating is cheating. Just because one method works better than the others doesn't change a thing Ben. |
|
| -----
It is his word versus ours. We like our word. We like where we stand and we like our credibility."--Lance Armstrong. |
|
|
BikeCzar
Posts:53
|
| 07/25/2013 10:18 AM |
|
| Absolutely agree, Keith. |
|
|
|
|
Cosmic Kid
Posts:4209
|
| 07/25/2013 10:23 AM |
|
I don't know that "cheating is cheating." If it was, then all infractions would carry the same penalty. But since they clearly don't, I think it is fair to say that some cheating is worse than others.
Now, does that pertain to doping? I dunno....gets a bit muddier. No doubt that EPO changed the fundamentals of how cycling operated. It also meant that if you wanted to ride, you had to dope. Period, end of story. That was not the case prior to EPO. The easy example is Andy Hampsten, who was competitive and won at the highest levels of the sport and is universally regarded as a clean rider.
That said, if EPO had been available to earlier generations, they certainly would have used it, as well. So in that sense, the "sin" of doping is the same from generation to generation, but the impact and magnitude of it has significantly increased over time.
|
|
| Just say "NO!" to WCP!!!!
|
|
|
Yo Mike
Posts:338
|
| 07/25/2013 10:25 AM |
|
Cheating is cheating, I agree, tho I do see Ben's POV.
Also: don't some people respond more effectively to different doping agents? The playing field could be 'level' for dope, but individual responses to that agent may make the difference in a race.
So, let's avoid more 'Tom Simpson memorials' or riders dying in their sleep with sludge-blood in their veins and just level the playing field with no dope for anyone. |
|
|
|
|
jmdirt
Posts:775
|
| 07/25/2013 11:02 AM |
|
| Yo Mike, everyone's body responds to everything differently. Some people respond to training loads better than others, some recover faster, some respond to alcohol differently, some to pollen worse than others. Arguing that one or some riders respond to dope better just goes back to genetics, meaning they are genetically superior. If you and I are on the same training plan (not including dope) you may respond better and that makes the difference in the race. Even in 100% clean sport, there is no level playing field. Doping is an attempt to level the playing field. |
|
|
|
|