Should Tom Simpson be striped of his titles?

[ufkacbln]

What part does the question play on modern cyclists?

.... it is more to do with hypocrisy.

The question is that given his doping history should we be honoring this "iconic human symbol of the tour, and a cherished sporting hero" or condemning him for illegally doping in contravention of the rules in place at the time?

The only comparison is the attitude of some who seem keen that cheating and doping should be condemned, and the instigators punished and titles stripped, but not in the case of Simpson.

 

[rich p]

.... it is more to do with hypocrisy.

The question is that given his doping history should we be honoring this "iconic human symbol of the tour, and a cherished sporting hero" or condemning him for illegally doping in contravention of the rules in place at the time?

The only comparison is the attitude of some who seem keen that cheating and doping should be condemned, and the instigators punished and titles stripped, but not in the case of Simpson.

Do you actually read any of the replies?
What has any of this got to do with chasing a currently competing athlete? Everyone has agreed with you that TS shouldn't have taken drugs but you seem to miss the points about attitudes at the time, convention, public opinion, interpretation by authorities, scale of abuse despite the infinite patience shown by many to an obvious wilful troll.
God, why am I here again. Help! Groundhog Day! HELP!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[ufkacbln]

Riders who tested positive in any particular race had that win taken from them. If you claim all or any previous race wins where they did not fail a test were stripped then you obviously do not know what you are talking about. Simpson passed all the tests he took after his wins so he was never stripped of a win.

That is fine, your original claim was that titles were not stripped and that was not the case.

The question still mains about the other titles such as "Most successful British Post War cyclist", and the other accolades?

 

[mickle]

Cunobelin, you're flogging a dead horse.

 

[ufkacbln]

Do you actually read any of the replies?
What has any of this got to do with chasing a currently competing athlete? Everyone has agreed with you that TS shouldn't have taken drugs but you seem to miss the points about attitudes at the time, convention, public opinion, interpretation by authorities, scale of abuse despite the

Such irony?

The question is simple why do we accept Simpson's doping?

The attitudes of the time, convention, public opinion, and scale of abuse though are inetersting diversions, so lets tackle them?

The attitude at the time was that doping was illegal and that it was an offence to dope (that also covers the interpretation by the authorities)

Public opinion at the time was also anti-doping following a number of high profile deaths and increasingly so after Simpson's death was televised in such a graphic way

Scale of Abuse - in which context does this have any real validity?
Do you mean that it is OK to dope a little, and if so how do you quantify that?
Do you mean that there is a defence that Simpson's doping was in any way justifeid " because others were doing it" and it was widespread?

 

[david k]

Seems distasteful to use the death of a cyclist many years ago to prove a point. I say let the man rest in peace.

 

[Crankarm]

I ate a Co-Op Truly Irresistable Beef Bourginon made with finest Angus beef three days ago. The last few days I have never felt better. Riding to work saturday I positively flew there and back nearly 40 miles. I felt I could ride fast forever. However I suspect I might have unwittingly doped given that Bertie ate some "finest" beef.

Back to this thread. Hindsight is a wonderful thing. TS was of his time. Leave the guy and his family alone.

 

[rich p]

Such irony?

The question is simple why do we accept Simpson's doping?
This proves to me that you either don't read the replies or lack the basic intellect to understand them - I have answered this in post no. 32 - QED, over and out, a toute a l'heure mon ami.

The attitudes of the time, convention, public opinion, and scale of abuse though are inetersting diversions, so lets tackle them?

The attitude at the time was that doping was illegal and that it was an offence to dope (that also covers the interpretation by the authorities)

Public opinion at the time was also anti-doping following a number of high profile deaths and increasingly so after Simpson's death was televised in such a graphic way

Scale of Abuse - in which context does this have any real validity?
Do you mean that it is OK to dope a little, and if so how do you quantify that?
Do you mean that there is a defence that Simpson's doping was in any way justifeid " because others were doing it" and it was widespread?

 

[ufkacbln]

This proves to me that you either don't read the replies or lack the basic intellect to understand them - I have answered this in post no. 32 - QED, over and out, a toute a l'heure mon ami.

Do you understand the concept of plural, or is this a case that you either don't read the replies or lack the basic intellect to understand them?

The idea of using a plural denotes that there are more people you there than you... and have opinions different to yours!


There is on typical post that describes Simpson as

an iconic hero of the Tour and a cherished sporting hero

Is an acceptance or condemnation of his doping, what do you think with your vast intellect?



. and why are you avoiding defining what you meant by "scale of abuse" and whether this justifies doping

 

[rich p]

I have seen no-one who doesn't think Simpson took amphetamines, I see no-one who thinks this was a good idea. What the fark are you arguing about?
No-one, not even me, can order people not to think he was an icon. Some folk still belieive Hitler and Thatcher were a force for good but hey - live with it.
As to scale of abuse - I've lost count of the number of times on this thread that people have patiently explained ( as if to small child) that amphetamines, whilst being banned, were not treated with the same opprobrium that systematic and scientific blood-doping in collusion with doctors and DS's now is.

Someone order me to stop talking to this troll. Please. I need help. It's like a drug. I should have my titles ( ISTC - Intellectual Superior to Cunobellin 2012) stripped.

 

[BJH]

Sorry but this thread is nonsense.

TS is said by anecdotal evidence to have been a user as we're most in his day. He is also said to have had amphetamines on him and in him when he died.

It's fair to say that you could potentially strip him of his finishing place on that years Tour if he had manged to get there.

There is no proof that he doped during ANY of his victories that would stand up in a case by WADA, therefore the discussion makes no sense. This isn't Lance.

Time to leave his memory to rest and drop this crap - please ?

 

[stewie griffin]

Cunobelin, why are you trolling?
As a relative newbie here I don't get it, you have a post count of 8 odd thousand, so I guess you like it here?
Why post such a ridiculous question the day before one of the happiest days to be a follower of British cycling?

 

[Boris Bajic]

Moderators or similar, this initially amusing thread has become a little glum and vitriolic.

I am no expert, but I believe that what we've got here is failure to communicate. Some men... you just can't reach.

I don't like it any more than you men....

Sorry, I was somewhere else for a moment there.

But please, put this increasingly nasty thread out of our misery.

The debating chamber of the House of Commons is beginning to look fair-minded and adult.

 

[Scoosh]

<Mod Hat on>

Personal abuse is NOT acceptable on CC.

This thread is locked.