Another +ve

[yello]

Yes, actors are competitive. But they all accept, first and foremost, there is a show to put on. The priority of the athlete is the reverse; win first - that's even if they are about a show!

I think anyone that denies that they find the whole sorry episode at least entertaining is perhaps scared to think for themselves as they believe that somehow because you were entertained that somehow that you agree with the dopers.

Not so. I know drugs exist. I know athletes take them. I'd simply prefer they didn't. It ruins my enjoyment of an event if the athletes are not competing equally. Personally, I don't know how an athlete could dope. They'll know, in their heart of hearts, that they didn't win fairly. It defeats the purpose of competing. So, yes, let them all take dope... but let everyone know about it!

I didn't say I don't find doping sagas 'entertainment' (in a different sense of the word) but as something separate, not as a part of the actual competition.

As for Amy WInehouse (musical merits aside); you talk her battles, her excesses, her life. This is all to do with the individual, and 'enjoyed' it that context; that's fine. A sporting event has many individuals and, yes, you can 'enjoy' the battles of the individual amongst all of that (and those battles may be personal too) but the context is different. The event, for me at least, is to the sum total of the individuals.

But it's a moot point doyler78. I can accept we enjoy things differently. I seem to recall that you said you want the dopers out too, and that's the more important bigger picture.

 

[doyler78]

YES I WANT DOPERS OUT.

You have totally missed the point.

Last year I got myself so wound up over all the doping that it ruined the TdF for me. This year I took a different perspective. It was to say that there are dopers out there. I don't know who they are though I could guess at a few however all I can do as a fan is to watch the sport and accept the race for what is. If someone is found to have doped then you throw them out and I continue to watch. It disappoints me when it happens but it doesn't surprise me.

I enjoyed watching Ricco just march of the front of main rivals. That was fantastic entertainment. He was found to have doped he was thrown out and the race still continues and I will continue to watch and take each days racing as it comes.

That isn't an approach which supports doping it is just one which accept that shoot happens. What I am not going to let happen this year is that those that are juiced up to their eyeballs ruin my enjoyment of the race.

If you get so het up about the doping and do so to the extent that you aren't enjoying the cycling or questioning every result then cycling may as well be dead for you. You can choose to take yourself down that path if you want but I'm not.

 

[MichaelM]

The only thing that surprises me, is that people are surprised when a rider tests positive.

I enjoy watching the tour, but do so on the assumption that most, if not all riders are at the very least pushing the limits of what is clean/legal.

Have a read of this:

http://sittingin.bicycling.com/

I got as far as:

I mean, Ricco was, literally, unbelievable, the way he was riding those mountains, his hands down in the drops, sprinting away from the best climbers in the world, up out of the saddle and pouncing on the steepness of the grade whenever his pace slacked, and the way he threw his arms in the air at the line each time, as if presenting himself to us rather than celebrating.

As I read that, in my mind was the voice of the commentator (Sherwen?) saying something along the lines of this young man is unbelievable, the way he leaves the best sprinters in the world behind. They just can't live with him -as Cavendish took his fourth stage.

But one of the gifted new generation wouldn't stoop to such depths would he. How many of you thought that of Rico?

Enjoy the Circus, I will.

 

[yello]

You have totally missed the point.

No I haven't. I just see the subject differently.

I am not being naive. I know there are dopers. They annoy me. All I have ever done is attempt to explain why they annoy me. That has nothing to do with how you see things, but that's not the point. We have different perspectives. Equally, I don't share the perspective of that article.

If you get so het up about the doping and do so to the extent that you aren't enjoying the cycling or questioning every result then cycling may as well be dead for you. You can choose to take yourself down that path if you want but I'm not.

Now you're just reading something into my view point! I've not said that I'm not enjoying the cycling, nor do I question every result. When Ricco burst out of the bunch, not for one moment did I think 'dope'. Maybe I'm an innocent, but I just thought it was incredible. There you have it in a nutshell; he duped me.

But I don't understand why you're getting angry? I don't think you're supporting the dopers in any way. Moreover, I'm not disagreeing with anyone's view. I'm quite happy for everyone to enjoy the tour any way they like.

As MichealM has just said...

I enjoy watching the tour, but do so on the assumption that most, if not all riders are at the very least pushing the limits of what is clean/legal.

That's my take on it too. It's like an unwritten contract. Dopers break that contract. That's why I get upset. End of.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

As I read that, in my mind was the voice of the commentator (Sherwen?) saying something along the lines of this young man is unbelievable, the way he leaves the best sprinters in the world behind. They just can't live with him -as Cavendish took his fourth stage.

Yeah but sprinting is a whole different thing - you get protected by your team all day, sheltered from the wind, helped back back if you drop behind, and as long as the peleton stays together, you have a good chance in the final 500 metres. It's about teams and one single explosive burst. Riding away from the entire field over the mountains is a whole different kettle of fish. I would find it unbelievable if Cavendish made a breakaway and got 15 minutes on the peleton, or did anything except finish in the autobus on a mountain stage, or even won a time trial...

 

[MichaelM]

Yeah but sprinting is a whole different thing - you get protected by your team all day, sheltered from the wind, helped back back if you drop behind, and as long as the peleton stays together, you have a good chance in the final 500 metres. It's about teams and one single explosive burst. Riding away from the entire field over the mountains is a whole different kettle of fish. I would find it unbelievable if Cavendish made a breakaway and got 15 minutes on the peleton, or did anything except finish in the autobus on a mountain stage, or even won a time trial...

Abdujaparov and Zabel spring to mind - but they were Eastern block weren't they.

Where's Tom Boonen this year?

Sprinters take drugs too.

 

[doyler78]

But it's a moot point doyler78. I can accept we enjoy things differently. I seem to recall that you said you want the dopers out too, and that's the more important bigger picture.

That sounded to me like you were suggesting that I had changed my opinion on wanting dopers out so I just made it plain that anti-doping was my view.

That was comment was intended as a general comment about not enjoying the cycling however I must admit you did give me that impression however I'm glad that isn't the case.

As regards MichaelM's comment which you quoted well let's hope its this side of legal that we are talking about otherwise you might have the equality already that we all seek ie if most are doping then we have a pretty equal field then

 

[doyler78]

Tom Boonen was barred not for using performance enhancing drugs but because he used a drug which in the current climate couldn't be tolerated by the ASO. It was cocaine.

I'm sure that there must be performance enhancing drugs out there that can benefit the sprinter also however I don't really know much about the pharmacology of certain drugs and their potential to enhance performance.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Abdujaparov and Zabel spring to mind - but they were Eastern block weren't they.

There was systematic doping in the Eastern bloc sports system - it has been admitted.

Where's Tom Boonen this year?

I don't think it's ever been suggested that Tom Boonen has taken anything more than coke - but if you have some evidence we don't, feel free...

We are talking about performance enhancement here, not recreation.

And, of course sprinters take drugs, but you can't really see a great deal of evidence of that in Cavendish's performances. What you can see is youth, self-belief and peak fitness, none of which will last more than a few years.

 

[MichaelM]

There was systematic doping in the Eastern bloc sports system - it has been admitted.

I pretty much predicted that as a come back.

I don't think it's ever been suggested that Tom Boonen has taken anything more than coke - but if you have some evidence we don't, feel free...

I know why he's not at the tour. Only cocaine? That's ok then.

And, of course sprinters take drugs, but you can't really see a great deal of evidence of that in Cavendish's performances.

What did Millar say on his blog... If it looks too good....

What you can see is youth, self-belief and peak fitness, none of which will last more than a few years.

Something similar was being said of Rico the other day. Young, new generation, talented....

Like I said, I enjoy watching the tour. But it seems that the press/commentators will praise British cyclists to the high heavens. An unbelievable ride by a Brit is down to talent and hard work, an unbelievable ride by an anyone else is too good to be true.

Nearly time for the afternoon circus.

Enjoy.

 

[Keith Oates]

If I was so convinced, as some people seem to be, that all top cyclists are on performance enhancing drugs and that is upsets me to know this, I would go away and join a tiddleywink club!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Flying_Monkey]

I pretty much predicted that as a come back.

Well, aren't you the prophet... seriously, though, it's predictable because it is true. If you have anything more to say about from some less than informative comments, then feel free...

I know why he's not at the tour. Only cocaine? That's ok then.

You can think what you like about recreational drugs, you can be a puritan or a party monster, but whatever you think, it has nothing to do with performance enhancement and no-one with any credibility is suggesting it is. Now, I am not going to tell you that Boonen doesn't dope, but you have nothing apart from insinuations.

What did Millar say on his blog... If it looks too good....

I've already explained why its very different for a sprinter. Now, again I am not telling you absolutely he doesn't dope, but again, you have nothing at all. Quite a lot of people around the professional scene have been voicing suspicions of Ricco before, but again, I haven't heard anyone with any credibility suggesting anything about Cavendish. And what's more, High Road were one of the first teams to introduce blood passports. So, what's your inside scoop?

 

[MichaelM]

There is no inside scoop. Nor do I need any inside scoop to believe it to be possible that any rider could use an illegal substance. I wouldn't be surprised if there were more positive tests this year, I certainly wouldn't be upset.

And what's more, High Road were one of the first teams to introduce blood passports. So, what's your inside scoop?

Now Team Columbia. And then they go and appoint Rolf Aldag as team manager. That wouldn't be the same Rolf Aldag who didn't test positive but later apologised for using EPO following accusations of a former team Telecom member would it?

Obviously not evidence against current Columbia riders, but then there's Riis at CSC, Astana doing whatever it is they are doing these days....

I'd love to be able to believe that cycling is clean, but I just can't.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Now Team Columbia. And then they go and appoint Rolf Aldag as team manager. That wouldn't be the same Rolf Aldag who didn't test positive but later apologised for using EPO following accusations of a former team Telecom member would it?

I know it is now Columbia, but they introduced the system when they were High Road...

Now, almost every manager and coach is from the era of almost universal drug taking. It hardly tells us anything. Basically your argument is that no-one ever changes for any reason. If nothing else, the financial interests of the sport can make people take a different approach, but people do change their ideas and approaches for all sorts of reasons. I know this from my own life. No-one is suggesting David Millar is still on EPO. And even Mr Sixty Percent himself is backing blood passports at CSC...

I'd love to be able to believe that cycling is clean, but I just can't.

Who is arguing that cycling is clean - and what does that mean anyway? I am just arguing that some people are making an effort. You seem to be arguing that any effort is pointless, or not to be believed, or that anyone who wins is s a suspect. It's as cynical and unhelpful as the reverse is naive and blind. We should support the efforts of teams to adopt continuous monitoring and schemes like the blood passport, and oppose those who don't.

As for Cavendish, read Prudhomme's comments in the Observer today. Prudhomme is never slow to condemn those he suspects (to the point of rudeness) and he is no particular friend of Britain, but he is utterly convinced of Cavendish's natural talent. Not only is there no reason at all to suspect that he is taking anything illegal, there is almost every reason to believe that he is not.

 

[MichaelM]

I know it is now Columbia, but they introduced the system when they were High Road...

Now, almost every manager and coach is from the era of almost universal drug taking. It hardly tells us anything.

Aldag was there when it was Highroad. Admitted to doping when it was High Road. He didn't do it out of remorse, he did it as he was unable to deny it. Columbia took over, and kept Aldag on. It tells us there's a team manager who at best will hide the truth for as long he can get away with it, and an employer that doesn't seem to care about that.

And as for Peiper - " I tried to race clean most of the time".

Basically your argument is that no-one ever changes for any reason.

I didn't say anything of the sort. I'm saying that cyclists have a proven track record blatantly lying, cheating, and of being evasive.

And even Mr Sixty Percent himself is backing blood passports at CSC...

Another one who wouldn't admit to doping until he couldn't deny it any longer.

Who is arguing that cycling is clean - and what does that mean anyway? .

I'll put it another way. When a group of people are training, racing, eating, sleeping, and spending so much time together - I'd expect at least one of them to pick up on any "abnormal" behaviour.


I'll quote you from another thread:

It is actually not good enough for Saunier-Duval's management to say that they didn't know.

That should apply to the management of all teams.

I am just arguing that some people are making an effort. You seem to be arguing that any effort is pointless, or not to be believed, or that anyone who wins is s a suspect. It's as cynical and unhelpful as the reverse is naive and blind. We should support the efforts of teams to adopt continuous monitoring and schemes like the blood passport, and oppose those who don't.

There's not enough effort being made. You mentioned yourself that some of Rico's previous results were raising questions. Why, if there was no evidence against him at the time? It's because pretty much anyone who wins IS a suspect.

As for Cavendish, read Prudhomme's comments in the Observer today. Prudhomme is never slow to condemn those he suspects (to the point of rudeness) and he is no particular friend of Britain, but he is utterly convinced of Cavendish's natural talent. Not only is there no reason at all to suspect that he is taking anything illegal, there is almost every reason to believe that he is not.

I don't genuinely believe Cavendish is doping, but there's a possibility, no matter how small that he could be.