October 23, 2014 Login  


30 is still high
Last Post 08/26/2013 05:05 PM by Jack Pouchet. 8 Replies.
Printer Friendly
Sort:
PrevPrev NextNext
You are not authorized to post a reply.
Author Messages
Pin0Q0

Posts:229

--
08/23/2013 10:32 AM

Draw your own conclusion from this article, but 30% is still high considering and I am wondering now if WADA is just as guilty as UCI. It seems they just want to justify their existence, they are in The Nile. Like D. Pound said “No one wants to catch any body”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/sports/research-finds-wide-doping-study-withheld.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0

GJanney

Posts:76

--
08/23/2013 07:09 PM
Interesting article, thanks for posting. It is sad commentary on how much money is involved in elite-level sports and how this drives this behavior so significantly.
ElleSeven

Posts:48

--
08/23/2013 07:16 PM
What is cheating for? As cheaters ourselves, not necessarily in sport but in other areas in which we blur the boundaries of correct behavior, what are we getting out of it? Or conversely, why do we not cheat? What do we get from that?

In cycling I never once in my career fudged that boundary. It was all around (yes, the chicks do it too) in a kind of heavily coded euphemistic language. And while no-one ever said "Take this, inject that," I did feel conscious about making a decision. I assume that those who break the rules feel similarly conscious about their decision. I loved, and still love, competing. The idea of competing seemed, in my mind, to exclude the option of breaking a clearly worded rule. If the rule says "taking Product X is illegal," I can't imagine doing that without, in some sense, recognizing that I am no longer "competing." I'm at best simulating completing, looking like someone who is competing.

I do understand that a man like Armstrong is a pathological narcissist -- and he's hardly the only one, only the most outrageous in his acting-out behavior -- and therefore more interested in external confirmations of his self-worth than in the kind of gratification that comes from within. That's obviously what the money is about, too, for a person as damaged as he is. There was no real money in women's cycling, and still isn't, so that can't be the only stimulus to push people over the line.

Nobody with a governing stake in the game is really asking the question I've just asked. There seems to be a pervasive denial about what social forces motivate this behavior. Can you fix this by just applying bigger budgets to policing and enforcing? What is the huge emphasis on punishment, apportioning blame and so on, really about? We have a penal system in the US that is phenomenally counterproductive if what we're trying to do is reduce crime and violence in society at large. Why, in a purely sporting context, would anyone expect stricter enforcement to yield moral improvements? If cycling is cleaning up -- by no means a certainty -- is this happening because Armstrong was "caught" in the simplistic sense of that term, or because he was morally outed? I'm convinced it's the latter.
Orange Crush

Posts:1207

--
08/23/2013 08:04 PM
WADA should thank UCI every day on its knees for its existence. As I have said many times, cycling is the only reason for WADA to appear slightly above the threshold of irrelevance. The article pretty much sums it up...In May, Dick Pound, a former WADA chairman, presented a report, ordered by the agency, on the current state of drug testing. In part, he and his team concluded, “There is no general appetite to undertake the effort and expense of a successful effort to deliver doping-free sport.” Cycling is at the cutting edge of the doping fight, ironically.

Interesting questions Elle but I don't think they really cut at the heart of the matter. Interesting radio ad from "Canada Drug Free.org": 1 in 5 kids have been high on prescription drugs...provided through their parents. You and I through our actions are their new drug dealers. In a society this addicted to popping pills and magic potions, what can we really expect? There's the real question and its a much bigger one than any agency can be expected to solve. It goes to the heart of where society is headed.
Pin0Q0

Posts:229

--
08/24/2013 06:54 AM
I agree with both observations, but the root cause like Elle7 said is money. For years I have said pro athletes are over paid… not just over paid but ridiculously overpaid. Sponsorship is the two-headed monster that any sport cannot do without. Without it small teams cannot exist and develop, too much of it creates greed and soon you are not competing in the sport but the science of cheating.

Why is it NFL/MLB tennis or soccer/football do not have a biological passport for their athlete? Bad publicity, that’s why…look what it did to cycling. The sport of cycling will survive since most fans are w.e warriors but your average Joe who sits on a couch for three hours watching his team is not the same. Take the wind out of that fan’s sail and the popularity of the sport will soon drop, when that happens sponsorship drops causing a drop in value of the team and sport. Not rocket science.

Pharma industry is the other two-headed monster. We need them but when they start targeting the normal person telling them they need a drug to make them feel better or because their foot is falling asleep or some other stupid reason that disgusts me, cause again it’s all about making money… as much as you can, for as long as you can. It is never enough.
Yo Mike

Posts:267

--
08/24/2013 10:03 AM
Ah,well. At least we still have that shining example of pure sportsmanship on the international level, showcasing dedicated athletes the world over: The Olympics.

/sarcasm
bobswire

Posts:295

--
08/24/2013 10:18 AM
Like any of this really matters. We live we die,next.
CarbonGecko

Posts:39

--
08/25/2013 06:10 PM
The primary root cause is not money. It is the overwhelming desire to win. Long before money in Olympic sports they poled olympic athletes about doping. The vast majority will do it if they think it will give them the win.
Money plays a part in that doping cost money... that is part of the reason Armstrong excelled. And some individuals are motivated mostly by money.
The vast majority of athletes from pros to amateurs to weekend warriors are motivated by WINNING. The tour, the world championship, the olympic gold, the second stop sign sprint on the local Tuesday night worlds. The ego is the biggest driver.

jpouchet

Posts:81

--
08/26/2013 05:05 PM
Interesting but the definition of doping forces many, at least those who wish to be honest in their reporting, to say "Yes" to the question as many OTCs, typical cold medicines, etc. have one or more components on the banned list. I try to keep a current copy of the USAC and UCI banned list around and once took it into my GP doctor. He said good luck fighting that cold you got buddy. Hope your run at the TdF is worth it.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Active Forums 4.1

Latest Forum Posts
Hey 79 posted in The Coffee Shop

2 years too late (Roman Kreuziger) posted in The Dark Side

PING: OC...What, no orange for LottoNL-Jumbo? posted in Professional Racing

cyclist door incidents article posted in Road Cycling

PING: Dale, 6ix and thinline posted in Road Cycling

Microshift posted in Gear Advice

Tour de France 2015 Winner Unveiled!! posted in Professional Racing

No articles match criteria.
  Terms and Conditions | Privacy Policy  Copyright 2008-2013 by VeloNation LLC