Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

"The 33"-Road Bike Racing We set this forum up for our members to discuss their experiences in either pro or amateur racing, whether they are the big races, or even the small backyard races. Don't forget to update all the members with your own race results.

View Poll Results: If 100% of the 1996 TDF doped, is Riis the winner?
Yes, he's the winner if 100% doped 37 75.51%
No, because... 12 24.49%
Voters: 49. You may not vote on this poll

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-07-07, 11:51 AM   #1
donrhummy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
donrhummy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 3,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Is Riis the 1996 TDF Winner if 100% Were Doping?

What if 100% of the cyclists from that race admitted to doping? Would that change whether you thought of Riis as the worthy victor? Or would it make no diff?
donrhummy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 12:11 PM   #2
Cypress
Giving you the business.
 
Cypress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Corvallis, Oregon
Bikes: Ridley Noah, Giant Trinity Advanced, Specialized Crux
Posts: 4,441
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Where is the "It's in the past, and winning the tour by default 11 year after the fact is worthless" option?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moderator
Dear Cypress,

You have received an infraction at Bike Forums.
Cypress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 12:32 PM   #3
'nother
semifreddo amartuerer
 
'nother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northern CA
Bikes: several
Posts: 4,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with Cypress on the specific case of Riis. Actually I'd say pretty much any case of retroactive title-stripping. Anything after the race has ended is really too late; the moment is gone.


But in general terms, this strikes me as a take on the "level playing field" argument, which I don't buy.

The net effect is, I don't really give a crap about pro cycling results, past or future. Actually I would extend that to pretty much any pro sport; it's just the nature of these arrangements to do anything necessary to win.
'nother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 12:33 PM   #4
Grasschopper
He drop me
 
Grasschopper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central PA
Bikes: '03 Marin Mill Valley, '06 Cannondale Rush, '02 Eddy Merckx Corsa 0.1, '07 Bottecchia Euro Sprint Tour Comp Elite Pro 1000
Posts: 11,433
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cypress
Where is the "It's in the past, and winning the tour by default 11 year after the fact is worthless" option?
The funny (or not) part is look at the results of the race...you are down to 5th or 6th place before you can even ask if the guy might have been clean.
__________________
The views expressed by this poster do not reflect the views of BikeForums.net.
Grasschopper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 01:29 PM   #5
Trevor98
Senior Member
 
Trevor98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Bikes:
Posts: 1,038
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Philosophically, it they all doped and thus had the same advantage then they couldn't cheat each other. If they all doped and we all either knew or should have known then we weren't cheated. If doping was simply as given within the peleton or at least as common as it appears to have been then the dopers were really competing against dopers- a fair but chemical competition.
Trevor98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 01:32 PM   #6
All1NTao
Pastafarian Prophet
 
All1NTao's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Allen, Texas
Bikes: Sandivk Titanium road with Easton Carbon bits and Dave Speed Dream Wheels. Breezer Lighting Mountain
Posts: 107
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...n07/jun07news2

Riis has been removed from the record books. He is no longer the winner of 1996 TdF
All1NTao is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 01:34 PM   #7
bdcheung
Carpe Diem
 
bdcheung's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: MABRA
Bikes: 2007 CAAD9; 2014 CAADX; PedalForce CG1
Posts: 13,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by All1NTao
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news.php?...n07/jun07news2

Riis has been removed from the record books. He is no longer the winner of 1996 TdF
Holy ****, are you serious? omfg, someone give this news flash its own thread!
__________________
"When you are chewing the bars at the business end of a 90 mile road race you really dont care what gear you have hanging from your bike so long as it works."
ΛΧΑ ΔΞ179 - 15% off your first Hammer Nutrition order!
bdcheung is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 01:43 PM   #8
roadgator
raodmaster shaman
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: G-ville
Bikes:
Posts: 1,431
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
i said no only because the extent of each rider's doping is unknown. i believe the vast majority of them were doping, but some were doing more than others. Which would still make it unfair. i have no clue who would have won, and it may have been Riis, but i dont think its accurate to assume that doping raised everyone's level equally.
roadgator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 02:25 PM   #9
Trevor98
Senior Member
 
Trevor98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Bikes:
Posts: 1,038
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Removing Riis' name from the TdF winner's record is merely symbolic. They don't have the authority to strip his title (as admitted) as that power is the UCI's. It's kind of like returning the symbolic yellow jersey. In ten years, almanacs and the like will still say Riis won.

Last edited by Trevor98; 06-07-07 at 04:13 PM.
Trevor98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 02:49 PM   #10
mike9903
Senior Member
 
mike9903's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Bikes: 09 Orbea Orca
Posts: 1,465
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The problem that comes to my mind if you say everyone else was doping at the time, is then it comes down to who can dope the best ($$$$). So people are basically buying the title instead of earning it.

Not sure if my logic makes any sense, just the first thing that comes to my mind.
mike9903 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-07, 09:05 PM   #11
donrhummy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
donrhummy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 3,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 'nother
I agree with Cypress on the specific case of Riis. Actually I'd say pretty much any case of retroactive title-stripping. Anything after the race has ended is really too late; the moment is gone.


But in general terms, this strikes me as a take on the "level playing field" argument, which I don't buy.

The net effect is, I don't really give a crap about pro cycling results, past or future. Actually I would extend that to pretty much any pro sport; it's just the nature of these arrangements to do anything necessary to win.
Not totally sure if this is what you're thinking by no level playing field, but I'm assuming you're saying that some guys might have access to better drugs than others. The problem with that is there's no level playing field even without drugs. one team might have more access to better technology for power training, hr training, analysis, perhaps they can afford better nutrition or altitude tents or maybe some athletes live at altitude or near mountains and others live in flat lands. There are a million things that make it so one guy can always have some advantage over another. If they're all doing drugs, the fact that some guys dope better than others is no different than some guys having altitude tents or others having better bikes, etc.
donrhummy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-07, 06:51 AM   #12
donrhummy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
donrhummy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 3,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by roadgator
i said no only because the extent of each rider's doping is unknown. i believe the vast majority of them were doping, but some were doing more than others. Which would still make it unfair. i have no clue who would have won, and it may have been Riis, but i dont think its accurate to assume that doping raised everyone's level equally.
Read my above post.
donrhummy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-07, 11:30 AM   #13
Treefox
Young and unconcerned
 
Treefox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Merry Land
Bikes: Yeah, I got a few.
Posts: 4,123
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You'd have to study who had the best dope! If Riis's dope wasn't as good as other riders', maybe he deserves it?
Treefox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-07, 12:25 PM   #14
harlond
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Richmond, VA
Bikes: Torelli Titanio; Serotta Atlanta Concept; Bridgestone MB4, Raleigh Twenty, Bike Friday Family Tandem
Posts: 394
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, even if Riis had the best dope, isn't that at least offset by having Godefroot as your DS?
harlond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-07, 01:04 PM   #15
'nother
semifreddo amartuerer
 
'nother's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Northern CA
Bikes: several
Posts: 4,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by donrhummy
Not totally sure if this is what you're thinking by no level playing field, but I'm assuming you're saying that some guys might have access to better drugs than others.
I'm merely saying I don't buy the idea of "everyone [is doping | should be allowed to dope], thus, it is a level playing field".

I did not mean to suggest that the field is or ever has been level, with or without dope. Even removing altitude tents and bikes from the equation, some factor on some level (financial support, genetics, training, diet, etc.) takes it out of level -- that's the nature of athletic endeavors. But that does not mean that anything and everything should be allowed.
'nother is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-07, 04:04 PM   #16
nitropowered
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Athens, Ohio
Bikes: Custom Custom Custom
Posts: 5,104
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Everyone's doped in the past, are doping now, and will be doping in the future. Theres no way around it.
nitropowered is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-07, 11:40 PM   #17
donrhummy
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
donrhummy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 3,481
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What do you think is making these cyclists admit to having doped? No one could ever have proved Riis doped. He gains nothing by it and possibly hurts his current team (which might be searching for a new sponsor for 2009). So why do it?
donrhummy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:21 AM.