"The 33"-Road Bike Racing - The amazing, concerted effort by the Euro organizers of pro cycling continues...

To destroy our beloved sport that is:

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AvoLnylF2RzqQjJ9g3hvUlx.grcF?slug=ap-tourdefrance-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

It really is astonishing. If the NFL or NBA managment pulled this crap, the fans would burn down their corporate offices. It's like Dick Pound & the Tour Organizers have announced a Jihad on pro cycling.

By the way if you want to watch a drug infested sport untroubled by any such misguided efforts, check out the Super Bowl next month and the World Series in October. The TV ratings will soar and the $ will flow. In the meantime the most notable cyclist in the world (Ivan Basso) can only get $2 million annually (that's like Beckham's bar tab) and he may be banned from the Tour de France AGAIN.

You can't make this stuff up. Maybe the French ARE idiots after all. At the very least they should get me some of the LeGanga they're smoking.

"Race director Christian Prudhomme said the investigation, in which 56 riders allegedly received given performance-enhancing drugs at a Madrid clinic, most likely won't conclude by the July 7 start of this year's tour."

The wheels of French justice grind slowly....

Mr. Pound's actions make so little sense that I think he's the one smokin all the Ganga.

Mr. Pound's actions make so little sense that I think he's the one smokin all the Ganga.
he's not smokin it, he's "testing" it


'ok that was in a pipe, now let's test it in the bong...':lol:

Mr. Pound's actions make so little sense that I think he's the one smokin all the Ganga.

While it has nothing at all to do with cycling, it might explain why all the snowboarders are clean now. :D

To destroy our beloved sport that is:

http://sports.yahoo.com/sc/news;_ylt=AvoLnylF2RzqQjJ9g3hvUlx.grcF?slug=ap-tourdefrance-doping&prov=ap&type=lgns

It really is astonishing. If the NFL or NBA managment pulled this crap, the fans would burn down their corporate offices. It's like Dick Pound & the Tour Organizers have announced a Jihad on pro cycling.

Prudhomme is TDF race director, not WADA. OP is not WADA. This has nothing to do with Pound, or WADA. Good example however, as there are no drugs in NFL. The American race clearly just has bigger balls.


By the way if you want to watch a drug infested sport untroubled by any such misguided efforts, check out the Super Bowl next month and the World Series in October. The TV ratings will soar and the $ will flow. In the meantime the most notable cyclist in the world (Ivan Basso) can only get $2 million annually (that's like Beckham's bar tab) and he may be banned from the Tour de France AGAIN.

All Birrillo has to do is provide DNA to exonerate himself, but he will only do this if it doesn't involve prosecution for OP (Hmmm). Meanwhile, Ullrich's DNA sample will be tested, and if it doesn't match those blood bags, he will be exonerated.

Besides, the TDF has the largest world TV audience of any sporting event outside of the World Cup, they really don't care about US ratings (I know this is hard to believe). Just like most of the world does not watch the football "World Championship", or the "World" series of baseball. By your argument, NASCAR is good sport.
Your argument that money is more important to sport than ethics and rules is not a commonly held opinion.
Cycling does not have big, stupid, salaries, but it is one of the few sports that does not charge its spectators to watch.


You can't make this stuff up. Maybe the French ARE idiots after all. At the very least they should get me some of the LeGanga they're smoking.

Of course the French are idiots, anyone outside of the US, or your mind, are 'idiots'. Yet Americans will flock in thousands to idiot-land every year rather than develop a decent, long-running, US Tour race. Then, they will ***** about having to follow the rules. Kind of pathetic.
I still don't see how the TDF defines the sport of cycling anyway, there are many better races, and better Tours than the TDF. Try watching some of the non-Lance spring classics, the Giro and the Vuelta.

For a better perspective, read Thompson's "The Tour de France: A Cultural History". Doping scandals have surrounded the TDF every year since the 60s. Rider protests happened as late as 1998.

Yet, the Tour gets more popular every year.

Uh huh...

For your statement making wardrobe... (www.cafepress.com/buy/floyd+landis/-/pv_design_details/pg_1/id_14190700/opt_/fpt_/c_360)

Prudhomme is TDF race director, not WADA. OP is not WADA. This has nothing to do with Pound, or WADA. Good example however, as there are no drugs in NFL. The American race clearly just has bigger balls.



All Birrillo has to do is provide DNA to exonerate himself, but he will only do this if it doesn't involve prosecution for OP (Hmmm). Meanwhile, Ullrich's DNA sample will be tested, and if it doesn't match those blood bags, he will be exonerated.

Besides, the TDF has the largest world TV audience of any sporting event outside of the World Cup, they really don't care about US ratings (I know this is hard to believe). Just like most of the world does not watch the football "World Championship", or the "World" series of baseball. By your argument, NASCAR is good sport.
Your argument that money is more important to sport than ethics and rules is not a commonly held opinion.
Cycling does not have big, stupid, salaries, but it is one of the few sports that does not charge its spectators to watch.



Of course the French are idiots, anyone outside of the US, or your mind, are 'idiots'. Yet Americans will flock in thousands to idiot-land every year rather than develop a decent, long-running, US Tour race. Then, they will ***** about having to follow the rules. Kind of pathetic.
I still don't see how the TDF defines the sport of cycling anyway, there are many better races, and better Tours than the TDF. Try watching some of the non-Lance spring classics, the Giro and the Vuelta.

For a better perspective, read Thompson's "The Tour de France: A Cultural History". Doping scandals have surrounded the TDF every year since the 60s. Rider protests happened as late as 1998.

Yet, the Tour gets more popular every year.

I agree with what you say, but I also feel that there is a right way to go about this and a wrong way. Unfortunately, it seems that many parties out there are more focused on getting as much media attention as possible (and dragging out the proceedings) than to help the sport itself.

>>of course the French are idiots, anyone outside of the US, or your mind, are 'idiots'.<<

Actually, just you. In fact half my family IS European, so I don't think all Europeans are that way. But the French running Le Tour make a compelling case for it. Many here would agree.

>>Yet, the Tour gets more popular every year.<<

Does it REALLY? You can't tell from rider salaries can you? If the Tour de France is such a runaway TV ratings hit, where's the dough? Not in Ivan Basso's bank account. Or ANY of the top pro riders, at least when measured against EVERY other major sport on the planet like soccer, American football, pro basketball, baseball, F1 racing, even friggin NASCAR already.

By the way, if the French don't care about US TV ratings (the largest consumer market on the globe) it would only tend to bolster the idotic French image, so you don't want to go there. I can assure you the suits @ the NFL and NBA front offices care about their TV ratings in Europe. That's called BUSINESS. Perhaps you've heard of it, they may have covered in in Macro Economics 101 in undergrad school. I'll bet you were out riding that day.

The irony from the Tour presentation this year was Richard Virenque was standing next to David Millar and Christophe Moreau with Johan Museeuw standing behind them. Now who's more guilty, the convicted or the accused? Basso and Ulrich et al have yet to be proven guilty, yet three of these of the four I've mentioned are convicted drug users and Museeuw is under serious investigation. If you are going to take a stand against drugs then take a stand, don't pick and choose who is a bad guy and who is not.

The irony from the Tour presentation this year was Richard Virenque was standing next to David Millar and Christophe Moreau with Johan Museeuw standing behind them. Now who's more guilty, the convicted or the accused? Basso and Ulrich et al have yet to be proven guilty, yet three of these of the four I've mentioned are convicted drug users and Museeuw is under serious investigation. If you are going to take a stand against drugs then take a stand, don't pick and choose who is a bad guy and who is not.
Good point Rojo!!

Shoot those accused dopers first, ask questions later!!

At the rate they're going the next Tour winner may be..... EURO!!!!

they should just ban the whole pro peloton and make it an amateur race. between six year olds. on training wheels.

they should just ban the whole pro peloton and make it an amateur race. between six year olds. on training wheels.

What do you mean they 'should just ban the whole pro peloton'? If you hadn't noticed they ARE banning the whole pro peloton. The cyclists any of us have ever heard of I mean.

Mission accomplished. The last fan to leave Paris can turn out the friggin lights.

they should just ban the whole pro peloton and make it an amateur race. between six year olds. on training wheels.

Hey, that could be my shot, can I use CF training wheels?

So they're going to compare the dna in Ullrich's bag o' blood with the dna in his spit. If the blood's clean, he's back on the bike. Case closed. Unless Jan's attorneys decide not to allow it. http://s3.amazonaws.com/advrider/eek7.gif

Any bets on what's going to happen in the next few weeks?

So they're going to compare the dna in Ullrich's bag o' blood with the dna in his spit. If the blood's clean, he's back on the bike. Case closed. Unless Jan's attorneys decide not to allow it. http://s3.amazonaws.com/advrider/eek7.gif

Any bets on what's going to happen in the next few weeks?

IFFF HE FAILS ZIS TEST HE VILL BE SHOT!

UND ZEN YOU VIL POST ON BIKE VORUMS UND DIZKUSS ITT DU VEENIES!

Actually, just you. In fact half my family IS European, so I don't think all Europeans are that way. But the French running Le Tour make a compelling case for it. Many here would agree.

>>Yet, the Tour gets more popular every year.<<

Does it REALLY? You can't tell from rider salaries can you? If the Tour de France is such a runaway TV ratings hit, where's the dough? Not in Ivan Basso's bank account. Or ANY of the top pro riders, at least when measured against EVERY other major sport on the planet like soccer, American football, pro basketball, baseball, F1 racing, even friggin NASCAR already.

By the way, if the French don't care about US TV ratings (the largest consumer market on the globe) it

Every post you make calls someone an idiot.

I think Lance Armstrong earned a buck or two at the Tdf.

Not all the world pollutes sport for money. Maybe the TDF should be run on one mile ovals for a month?

The largest consumer market is rapidly shifting to China. I think that your perspective is skewed.

Ever been to Europe?

So they're going to compare the dna in Ullrich's bag o' blood with the dna in his spit. If the blood's clean, he's back on the bike. Case closed. Unless Jan's attorneys decide not to allow it. http://s3.amazonaws.com/advrider/eek7.gif

Any bets on what's going to happen in the next few weeks?

They will try everything they can to prevent that test, like Basso will only give DNA if it is not used for ongoing investigations.
It would help if they stopped acting like they've got something to hide.

This sucks, but it has to be done.

Every post you make calls someone an idiot.

I think Lance Armstrong earned a buck or two at the Tdf.

Not all the world pollutes sport for money. Maybe the TDF should be run on one mile ovals for a month?

The largest consumer market is rapidly shifting to China. I think that your perspective is skewed.

Ever been to Europe?


• Lance earned his money at the Tdf by winning SEVEN of them (not one, not two, SEVEN, just helping you count here) and helped the organizers expand the Tour's audience to places like China and greatly enhanced the Tour's stature and ratings in the USA and globally. THEN these Tour boneheads did everything in their power to smear his reputation on allegation and charges which were utterly unsubstaniated with any real concrete evidence. But all they did was cast aspersions on their own event. That's brilliant. Go figure.

• China will be the largest consumer market in a decade or two. In the meantime it's North America. I know this makes you crazy, but there it is.

• 'Have I been to Europe'? I'll repeat it another time (repetition being the mother of comprehension) but half my family lives there. I've been there about 20 times most recently two weeks in August. When I go I take my bicycle. Naturally.

• 'Not all the world pollutes sport for money'? Well on THIS planet they do. You're on the Planet DocRay which appears to have its own laws of bizarro physics and logic.

• If you're a physician you fit right in. After my five year medical cluster **** I'd say that's PERFECT. Doc.

It would help if they stopped acting like they've got something to hide.


True but if you were being prosecuted in an atmosphere polluted Dick Pound you might be more reluctant to give up DNA as well. The agenda seems to be that you are guilty now prove your not. In that type of environment who's to say how that DNA would be used? These guys have very few options to protect themselves from wrongful prosecution, I understand their reluctance.

• Lance earned his money at the Tdf by winning SEVEN of them (not one, not two, SEVEN, just helping you count here)



Just to help you count, he signed some major contracts with Nike and others after winning his first. Lance was well on his way to being a multi-millionaire long before he won 7 Tours. His pay packet alone from USPS was worth over a million bucks so please don't make it sound like he was washing dishes on side until number seven rolled around.

Your anlogy that the Tour isn't gaining in popularity because riders haven't received huge sums of money isn't a valid one. First spectators don't pay to watch the event live. The sole income for the Tour organizers comes from advertisement and rights from the towns that have starts and finishes. To use your logic NASCAR is one of the fastest growing entertainment sports in the USA. Yet the highest paid drivers in NASCAR make what mid field drivers make in F1, a form of motorsport that hardly compares to NASCAR's popularity here in the US. Michael Schumacher salary was the highest in sport, 55mil per year, even higher than MJ in his prime.

>>His pay packet alone from USPS was worth over a million bucks <<

Oh that's impressive. Particularly when the top soccer player on the planet just signed a deal worth a reported $50 million annually, Arod on the Yankees (and a few other top players) make in the vicinity of $20 million + as do top basketball players. Sports is a business and the success/popularity of any pro sport translates directly to player salaries.

>>His pay packet alone from USPS was worth over a million bucks <<

Oh that's impressive. Particularly when the top soccer player on the planet just signed a deal worth a reported $50 million annually, Arod on the Yankees (and a few other top players) make in the vicinity of $20 million + as do top basketball players. Sports is a business and the success/popularity of any pro sport translates directly to player salaries.

Please read this slowly so you will understand. Soccer/Baseball/Basketball all have a paying audience in the stands. Those people bring in a lot of revenue. Cycling doesn't have a paying audience. If it did the revenue would be massive, T-Mobile is the best funded team on the planet and it's budget is less than what ARod's annual salary is. If the Yankee's annual budget was 15 million do you think they would be giving ARod 25mil? You need to have some perspective on this, which I know may be hard for you, but give it a shot.

Besides my point about LA's salary was to counter the fact that you said it took him 7 Tour wins to make his money. What you said was factually incorrect.

Please read this slowly so you will understand.

That doesn't help.

The lack of stupid salaries is one reason why I like cycling. The other point is that tours cost a lot more to run than stadium sports.

Again, the DNA testing issue is not WADA, or Pound, everyone assumes now that Pound is the center of everything.
The riders have international laws on privacy and RIPPA rights on their DNA, so any argument that way is just a cheap smokescreen. Violating these laws are already criminal offences, these laws have been in place since the 90s.

I only trust that Eric Zabel had nothing to do with Fuentes or any blood doping, he was the first to offer his DNA. No way Birillo will agree to this.

By this bizarre money = good sport argument, patent would have us believe that the Olympics and College Basketball are not good sports. I'll take March madness over a bunch of whiny, arrogant, overpaid coked-up NBA gamers any day. I'll see a better high-school football game than the typical NFL game.

I don't know where in Europe your family is from, but most of Europe really doesn't care about how the US perceives its sport. Sports like soccer and F1 were thriving in Europe without any US audience.

There is no doubt that money has ruined F1, there are only a handful of real teams.

Besides, cycling in US sports has run its course, in the early 1900s, track racers made more than Babe Ruth, and there were >30 velodromes in New York alone. Somehow, tastes evolved such that watching a bunch of guys standing around, spitting and scratching themselves is more interesting that a Track sprint.
I don't get why track racing is so dead in North America, it's a spectacle, it's exciting and dangerous, it's cheap to televise, and you can charge for admission.

Please read this slowly so you will understand. Soccer/Baseball/Basketball all have a paying audience in the stands. Those people bring in a lot of revenue. Cycling doesn't have a paying audience. If it did the revenue would be massive, T-Mobile is the best funded team on the planet and it's budget is less than what ARod's annual salary is. If the Yankee's annual budget was 15 million do you think they would be giving ARod 25mil? You need to have some perspective on this, which I know may be hard for you, but give it a shot.

Besides my point about LA's salary was to counter the fact that you said it took him 7 Tour wins to make his money. What you said was factually incorrect.

I understand all of that, and the money in pro cycling is still rather pathetic. Undermined, no doubt by the inconceivably misguided and moronic anti-doping tactics foisted on the sport by the UCI brain trust. I agree that cycling will never bring in the revenues of other sports, very correct. If this whole doping business had been handled more tactfully - starting with NOT going after Lance and ending with having doping controls that actually discourage meaningful cheating (i.e. even if Floyd's testosterone was high, well then, so WHAT according to most doping experts) - the sport wouldn't be in the friggin toilet and pro rider salaries would be double what they are. I'm sure the sponsor money fleeing pro cycling at this point is INCALCULABLE.

They'll never know how many Euros their policies are costing them. But forget that. It's costing the sport it's entire reputation.

Please read this slowly so you will understand. Soccer/Baseball/Basketball all have a paying audience in the stands. Those people bring in a lot of revenue.Cycling doesn't have a paying audience. If it did the revenue would be massive, T-Mobile is the best funded team on the planet and it's budget is less than what ARod's annual salary is. If the Yankee's annual budget was 15 million do you think they would be giving ARod 25mil? You need to have some perspective on this, which I know may be hard for you, but give it a shot.

Besides my point about LA's salary was to counter the fact that you said it took him 7 Tour wins to make his money. What you said was factually incorrect.

actually they do, for the larger events, at the finish line.

The tickets for the 03 Worlds were $50, but even with international TV and sponsors, the event barely broke even.

They'll never know how many Euros their policies are costing them. But forget that. It's costing the sport it's entire reputation.

So none of the blame is on cheating riders?

No way. 2007 may be screwed up, but I bet that many riders are going to race clean after 2006-7. Especially if sponsors start independent testing. I'll take a few screwy years for the sake of a cleanup.

So none of the blame is on cheating riders?



Nothing could ever possibly illustrate the depth of how hopeless it is to discuss anything with you than that last statement.

Thank you for saving me the energy in the future. Please ignore my threads forever and we'll both be happier.

Nothing could ever possibly illustrate the depth of how hopeless it is to discuss anything with you than that last statement.

Thank you for saving me the energy in the future. Please ignore my threads forever and we'll both be happier.

So all that sworn testimony by US Postal riders and managers about the team doping program is another french conspiracy?
Tyler has an evil twin?
Floyd's beer drinking was the cause of his positives?
Years of hormone abuse did not lead to testicular cancer?
No one found bags of blood in Spain?
David Millar was coerced into admitting he took EPO?
All those dutch riders dying at once was a coincidence?

It's nice and warm down here...

http://www.parida.com/img1/head-in-sand.jpg

obviously, once again, we're all idiots.

[COLOR="Silver"]

actually they do, for the larger events, at the finish line.


i bet dick pound is resposible for that too!!......:D

Please read this slowly so you will understand. Soccer/Baseball/Basketball all have a paying audience in the stands. ...
Only the first portion of this is directed to El Diablo Rojo...

True, that accounts for a portion of the difference, but not 90% (roughly the difference between what cyclists get paid and what football players - or futbol players make). Figure also, that the average pro cyclist wheels his bike up to the line in a competitive event many more times than athletes in some of the other high-paying sports do. Overall, their numbers are fewer as well.

On the other side, it certainly does cost more to stage and provide coverage for a cycling event.

Does that explain the differential? Perhaps some of it, but I think that economically, pro cyclists are getting shortchanged.

I think anyone who follows the sport understands the importance of having rules, and following rules. I haven't heard anyone credibly put forth an argument to not have rules, certainly not the fellows who usually bump heads with each other here at any rate. However, when one perceives that some of the details of the rules are arbitrary or counterproductive to the sport or to an event, who's not going to open their mouth and say so?

Seems to me that most of the arguments between people who claim to love the sport is really a clash of personalities and biases. Maybe the combattants find that part of the fun, but it sure can look messy to those of us on the outside looking in.

Peace,

Z

Only the first portion of this is directed to El Diablo Rojo...

True, that accounts for a portion of the difference, but not 90% (roughly the difference between what cyclists get paid and what football players - or futbol players make). Figure also, that the average pro cyclist wheels his bike up to the line in a competitive event many more times than athletes in some of the other high-paying sports do. Overall, their numbers are fewer as well.

On the other side, it certainly does cost more to stage and provide coverage for a cycling event.

Does that explain the differential? Perhaps some of it, but I think that economically, pro cyclists are getting shortchanged.

I think anyone who follows the sport understands the importance of having rules, and following rules. I haven't heard anyone credibly put forth an argument to not have rules, certainly not the fellows who usually bump heads with each other here at any rate. However, when one perceives that some of the details of the rules are arbitrary or counterproductive to the sport or to an event, who's not going to open their mouth and say so?

Seems to me that most of the arguments between people who claim to love the sport is really a clash of personalities and biases. Maybe the combattants find that part of the fun, but it sure can look messy to those of us on the outside looking in.

Peace,

Z

Ok lets remember that the annual budget for most team is well under 15 million dollars. How do you expect them to pay 30 riders multi-million dollar salaries on that? For example Tinkov's net worth is reportedly 200 million dollars, that's less than what the Yankee's have for a payroll. Think about that. The vast majority of a teams budget is paid by sponsors while in the NFL and other sports teams also get a piece of the television revenue and other pieces of the pie. It's easy to say that cyclist are underpaid compared to other sports but when compared to the annual revenue of the NFL you could buy the entire Pro Tour, its teams and infrastructure several times over.

What some of the posts above seem to be missing is an elemental economic consequence of the UCI's approach to purging the sport of drugs: pro cycling's image on the rocks, sponsors being scared away and fans being alienated - which means an tremendous (and incalculable) drain on the amount of money available for cycling team sponsorship, ergo rider salaries. The goal is laudible of course - in an ideal world it would be great to 'clean up' pro cycling.

But wait a minute here. Pro cycling has been allegedly 'dirty' for how long - 40+ years? Before EPO it was amphetamines (British cyclist Tom Simpson died on Mt. Ventoux after a speed-induced collapase way back in 1967). Steroids and other substances have been a part of all serious sports from high school to the pros for many decades. So what's different now? The abused substances now have greater potential to enhance performance and cause death and injury (nobody ever died from a coronary induced by anabolic steroids, but dozens of cyclists' EPO usage has led to their deaths). It's arguable that you'll be battling these substances forever. With each new doping test will come new strategies for eluding those tests and masking the illicit agents.

So what did the UCI do? The took the initial 'evidence' from a Spanish police investigation(not reviewed by any court) and banned the biggest names in cycling from last year's Tour de France - without so much as a public hearing. Which comes as close to hollering 'burn her, she's a witch!!' as you can get outside of a Monty Python movie. And did they 'clean up' the sport? Well the Tour de France winner tested POSITIVE for a 'banned substance' - and later every doping expert I heard said 'but that wouldn't have helped Landis win the stage, it makes no sense'. The net result? The sport's not cleaner, but it's poorer, sadder, more marginalized, losing fans, TV ratings, etc.

It's not about 'no blame for the riders' - which is a silly comment. It's not about assigning blame at all. To me if top riders like Jan or Lance ever doped it's because they felt pressured to because their competitors were also doping - so it's hard to see why they WOULDN'T be doping given the stakes. Blaming those 'cheating riders' is kind of like arresting a homeowner for gun possesion in a crime filled neighborhood. So whether you're Lance or Dick Pound it should be about getting a handle on the doping problem to the degree possible - without utterly trashing pro cycling and subsequently wrecking its economics and fan base. They're throwing the baby out with the bath water. Better to allow some ALLEGED doping to go on - than to convict innocent riders through unsubstantiated allegations that never pan out. That's sort of like the death penalty - if you execute one wrong man, it's too many. The current UCI stance is more like 'they're all probably doing it and we won't tolerate it'. Well, OK, then don't be surprised if millions of fans turn away in disgust thinking the sport is hopelessly 'dirty'. The UCI is telling them so.

As a cycling fan I would GREATLY prefer a more cautious and measured approach. If Ulrich, Basso et al had been allowed to compete in the 2006 Tour they would have certainly been under quite an anti-doping microscope. And ultimately if they failed a doping test - it would have been a legitimate pathway to pursue those competitors. Just like they're pursuing Landis. But when the Tour de France officials just about hang the 'suspect' (Landis) in the press before his hearing - where are you going with THAT? Nowhere. Absolutely nowhere.

Ask yourself this: why don't the governing organizations of every other major professional sport anywhere in North America or Europe follow the UCI's lead? Because they don't want to chew off their own leg in an effort to get out of the doping trap. That's why. If there was some hope this 'scorched earth' anti doping policy would result in a cleaner sport - perhaps you could make a case for it. But any gains will be temporary. Doping is far more stubborn than that (remember T. Simpson?). And the price cycling will pay is far too high.

We'll all be watching the Tour on the friggin Knitting Channel. If we're lucky.

What some of the posts above seem to be missing is an elemental economic consequence of the UCI's approach to purging the sport of drugs:

I'm not missing that point at all. I totally agree with it. However if WADA and the UCI suddenly turned a blind eye to doping and all the negative press went away you still wouldn't have cyclist making multi-million dollar salaries. Yes the odd superstar will get the big bucks but that still would pale to what any mid-talent NFL or NBA player gets. This goes back to the fact that cycling is paid for, by a huge amount, by sponsorship dollars. The budgets are just too small for 30 riders to paid millions of dollars. Even if the teams budgets were magically doubled and every rider salary was doubled along with it, cyclist would still be vastly underpaid when compared to most 'mainstream' athletes worldwide.

Part of the reason that the Yankee's can pay ARod 25mil a year is that the income from the merchandise, ticket, and higher tv ratings that someone like ARod could potentially bring to the franchise. Believe me the MLS wouldn't have paid Beckem 250 mil over 5 years if they thought he wouldn't do the same (I don't think he'll make much of difference but ya never know).

I do agree with you that the actions that WADA and UCI have taken have hurt cycling far more than they have helped it. The riders are partly to blame for this situation as they have allowed the governing bodies to ride roughshod over their ability to defend themselves against any doping charges. I understand why this has happened, after the Festina affair the riders and the organizers were shocked into over reaction. Since this sport is primarily funded by outside sponsorship the riders and organizers did these things to protect their interests. Unlike other sports, where the money flows in from many sources and at much higher amounts, the athletes can organize and protect (some would say hide their guilt) their rights. Believe me if a baseball teams money were controlled by one sponsors decision to stay or go over the bad publicity of the steroid scandal you would have seen a much stronger reaction by the league.


The constant fight for control of the sport between the UCI and the GT organizers hasn't helped much either. Frankly I see the ProTour, with it's efforts to organize the sport more like F1, to be best way forward in regards to building the sport. It needs to be tweaked a bit and the UCI's reluctance to make any changes to it's format has caused this fight to escalate.

My personal feelings are that if WADA doesn't either put a muzzle on DP or fire him, and the UCI and the GT organizers don't quit this constant bickering cycling is in for massive downturn in it's fan base.

It's not about turning a 'blind eye' to doping. It's about a measured response that attempts to address the problem without destroying the economic and fan base of your professional sport. They seem to get this in other major sports. Why cycling's executives don't is puzzling. Part of the issue is the fact that world class cycling is arguably the toughest sport on the planet in many ways and the allure of doping for participants is greater than in most other sports.

I'm not sure what's off the wall, the UCI's scorched earth approach to their doping dilemma or the fact that there are cycling 'fans' here like DR who seem to support it. Hey, there are religious fanatics who walk around whipping themselves too so go figure. Do you really want to see your sport go in the tank over this? Again, doping has been around for DECADES. And it will be for many more. Gradually I think the anti-doping tests can get a handle on it. But eagerly throwing the sport's top names under the friggin bus every time allegations surface is unfathomable.

But by far the most astonishing aspect of this is that there are some people on this board who say they're fans of our sport who actually think trashing riders on mere allegation and suspicion is a good idea. I don't see how that helps pro cycling. Quite the opposite. Take a look at what's unfolded at the highest levels of pro cycling - with all the attendant negative headlines - and carefully consider that before you jump on the virulent anti-doping bandwagon. From here it looks more like an anti-cycling crusade. Going OUT OF YOUR WAY to cast aspersions on the man who won seven Tour de France races, single-handedly elevated world wide interest in the sport to higher levels and passed every dope test you ever gave him? Jeesh, if you really think he may have been doping just give him a plaque for having the most diabolical anti-doping test scheme in the history of sport and be done with it already.

Or better yet, shut up and try to catch some real, verifiable dopers. With PROOF.

Ok lets remember that the annual budget for most team is well under 15 million dollars. How do you expect them to pay 30 riders multi-million dollar salaries on that? For example Tinkov's net worth is reportedly 200 million dollars, that's less than what the Yankee's have for a payroll. Think about that. The vast majority of a teams budget is paid by sponsors while in the NFL and other sports teams also get a piece of the television revenue and other pieces of the pie. It's easy to say that cyclist are underpaid compared to other sports but when compared to the annual revenue of the NFL you could buy the entire Pro Tour, its teams and infrastructure several times over.

I guess they either must have very anemic television contracts, or someone else (perhaps race sponsors) is pocketing a huge percentage of the take. Given the number of races in Europe and the popularity of the sport, it's hard to accept that someone isn't living comfortably off the revenues (which do indeed appear to fall short of any of the top football leagues on the continent).

Sponsors don't make money off pro cycling - unless it's indirectly through the advertising/marketing benefit derived from the exposure they get.

So what did the UCI do? The took the initial 'evidence' from a Spanish police investigation(not reviewed by any court) and banned the biggest names in cycling from last year's Tour de France - without so much as a public hearing. Which comes as close to hollering 'burn her, she's a witch!!' as you can get outside of a Monty Python movie. And did they 'clean up' the sport? Well the Tour de France winner tested POSITIVE for a 'banned substance' - and later every doping expert I heard said 'but that wouldn't have helped Landis win the stage, it makes no sense'. The net result? The sport's not cleaner, but it's poorer, sadder, more marginalized, losing fans, TV ratings, etc.

Spot on!

I think that for the most part, we all are for cleaning up the sport; however, not at the COST of the sport! Cheating is cheating, and shouldn't be tolerated. Creating a lose/lose situation cannot be the answer though.

I guess they either must have very anemic television contracts, or someone else (perhaps race sponsors) is pocketing a huge percentage of the take. Given the number of races in Europe and the popularity of the sport, it's hard to accept that someone isn't living comfortably off the revenues (which do indeed appear to fall short of any of the top football leagues on the continent).

Again you need to put this into perspective. TV contracts, to a large degree, are based on ad revenue (the NFL being a glaring exception here). Aside from the TdF cycling probably gets a fraction of the ad revenue that say Manchester United (I'm no huge soccer fan so maybe MU isn't the biggest draw in the UK) would get from it's broadcasts. Again even if you were to increase the budgets of each team by 100% riders still wouldn't be making the nearly the same salaries as futballers or F1 drivers. This isn't a situation where T-Mobile and Ag2r are getting fat while the riders are living just above the poverty line, cycling isn't a rich sport in any sense of the modern sports world.

So what did the UCI do? The took the initial 'evidence' from a Spanish police investigation(not reviewed by any court) and banned the biggest names in cycling from last year's Tour de France - without so much as a public hearing.

They didn't have time for a public hearing. It sucked, but the UCI had to show the cyclists that they were serious, and that it is up to the riders to make sure they are clean. They were sick of riders working around the dope tests (i.e. Millar, Heras). I was really disappointed when Basso and Ullrich got kicked out, but in hindsight, it was the best thing to do.
You can bet Birillo won't go through that again, and genuine fear has come over the peloton.

You also assume wildly that the public, and yourself, has all the information. Look at what happened after July: If Basso was so clean, why was CSC/Riis so quick to drop him? Similarly, why did T-Mobile drop their star rider after an internal investigation? We don't know what T-Mobile concluded, but it was enough to terminate Ullrich's contract without fear of a lawsuit, and let go of Pevenage. A few OP-accused riders immediately retired. These all seem like irrational acts. And many disturbing facts about Basso's sister and Eddy Mazzolini have come to light.

Doping is engrained in cycling, and many ex-riders in Europe have written books stating that doping is rampant at the under-23 level, and have admitted to doping, and never got caught. Certainly, every rider I knew who went to race in Europe came back very disillusioned.

All of this is a necessary evil, and the sport will be better for it. If they just let things go, it will dilute the sport and end up like baseball, where no event really matters, and no one believes any record anymore. Or, the sport will be dominated by one rider with the power and influence to squash any rumors in the peloton or the 'free' press with legal thugs, and publish propaganda books.

The UCI wants blood samples, as definitive proof of blood doping if blood bags are found, they can prove or exonerate a rider, immediately. But riders are not willing to provide DNA, Bettini says he'll quit first. If they had DNA samples last July, riders could have proved their innocence. So if the riders will not work with the UCI, they should not participate. The UCI can provide absolute proof, but the riders won't let them.

I can't agree that this is one sided, the riders and organizers need to work together, or the status quo will ruin the sport. Cognitive denial won't work either.

So what do you suggest the UCI do? Nothing? Testing as it is won't work, tests have been proven beatable. how would Patentcad fix pro cycling?

Sponsors don't make money off pro cycling - unless it's indirectly through the advertising/marketing benefit derived from the exposure they get.

That's true of any sports sponsorship.

Ok lets remember that the annual budget for most team is well under 15 million dollars. How do you expect them to pay 30 riders multi-million dollar salaries on that?

charge a dollar a post on forums.

As for the Riis/Basso thing, I'm not so sure that Basso didn't want out of his contract because Riis essentially threw him to the lions. Basso had said that he had a father son relationship with Riis and if he felt betrayed maybe he wanted out not the other way round? As you say Doc we don't know all the facts and this case is no different. Riis had said that he would have kept Basso if he'd known that Basso was going to agree to DNA testing. If find if hard to understand why Basso would agree to this testing (on his terms) with Disco but not CSC. Also the atmosphere at CSC didn't seem to welcoming after reading the remarks of some of the team members including Jens. This decision could have been all Ivan's for all we know. To assume the reason he left CSC is because he's guilty is just that, and assumption.

CS had the estimated budget for all pro tour teams in the latest issue. Take out Disco and T-Mobile and they are all under 10mil US.

Just some quick information I found in about 0.10 seconds on Google.

http://www.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/2001/01/08/newscolumn2.html
Seat revenues for the NFL - $800 million/year
TV revenues for the NFL - $18 billion/year

When where there more than 11-12 teams in F1? Prior to 1950? The two main factors of winning a world championship in F1 has always been about money and what rules Enzo could change for his benefit. Since Enzo is dead now, the second rule is pretty much mute.

But wait a minute here. Pro cycling has been allegedly 'dirty' for how long - 40+ years? So what's different now?
Not much, really. The PED's aren't any more dangerous nowadays, just harder to detect. Amphetamines are not exactly harmless, y'know.

Basically, McQuaid finally started verbally laying about with a sheleigh this year -- but the UCI actually hasn't done much at all, really (see below). McQuaid barely even acknowledged that cycling had an issue before 2006, from what I can tell. So most of the "difference" is that a Tour winner got accused and the press actually paid attention to a doping scandal. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.



So what did the UCI do? The took the initial 'evidence' from a Spanish police investigation(not reviewed by any court) and banned the biggest names in cycling from last year's Tour de France - without so much as a public hearing....
I recommend you get your facts straight. (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/30/sports/30cnd-doping.html?ex=1309320000&en=6e1878699601ebc0&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
)

While it is possible that the UCI was maneuvering behind the scenes, it was the organizers of "Le Tour" who banned the riders and disinvited Astana-Wurth, based upon a list generated by the Spanish police. The Tour organizers were even willing to defy a CAS ruling that allowed A-W to ride. Ultimately, Astana-Wurth voluntarily withdrew, T-Mobile suspended Ullrich, and Riis suspended Basso, after seeing documents related to OP.

Last I checked, the UCI is not even allowed to ban riders at all. All disciplinary actions are performed by national federations and can be appealed to the CAS.

I.e., the UCI did not ban anyone, fire anyone, disinvite anyone, investigate anyone, test anyone, or cancel any sponsorships because of OP. They didn't even suspend any team licenses except one of the Astana splinters -- and that was because someone didn't file the paperwork on time. All they've done so far is yell at a bunch of local federations and decry the Spanish court's decision to lock down the OP evidence until the criminal proceedings are completed.



Which comes as close to hollering 'burn her, she's a witch!!' as you can get outside of a Monty Python movie.
Or, it's like being fired by your boss because you were arrested for alleged involvement in a drug ring.



And did they 'clean up' the sport? The sport's not cleaner, but it's poorer, sadder, more marginalized, losing fans, TV ratings, etc.
Yes, more doom and gloom. The sky is falling too, by the way, so watch your head. :D

I agree that in the short run things aren't looking so hot. However, some of the teams are now taking additional steps to enforce anti-doping rules, and I believe that sponsors like T-Mobile will not tolerate having their spiffy brand names sullied with more doping scandals. I might add that barely 6 months has passed since OP was leaked, almost no evidence has been officially released, and all OP evidence is tied up until the criminal cases against Fuentes et al are concluded. So the UCI simply has not had the time or tools to genuinely lay about with the aforementioned sheleigh. Any "cleanup" right now is strictly due to the efforts of sponsors, from what I can tell.

While I will not say that all of the anti-doping actions are managed perfectly, some fans would squeal like stuck pigs even if they were. And in the long run, if road cycling can't get doping abuses under control, IMO it isn't worth watching at all. I enjoy competitions between athletes who excel because of their dedication and talents, not their skillful intake of pharmaceutical products.

I'd ask you to actually prove that cycling is "losing fans" as a direct result of the UCI's actions (as opposed to, say, the retirement of Lance)... except that I'm sure no actual evidence to support such a conclusion actually exists.



Blaming those 'cheating riders' is kind of like arresting a homeowner for gun possesion in a crime filled neighborhood....
While I concur that the pressure to cheat is tremendous, and I have sympathy for anyone in that situation, that does not justify their actions in any way, shape or form -- particularly for a doper who receives substantial financial rewards from their wins.

They aren't cheating to avoid getting fired, to feed their families or to pay six months back rent. They're cheating to cross the finish line first.

Anyone who did in fact dope chose to violate the rules and risk their own health and safety in order to shave mere seconds off their time, and in doing so they rob an honest competitor of the respect and rewards they deserve.



If Ulrich, Basso et al had been allowed to compete in the 2006 Tour they would have certainly been under quite an anti-doping microscope. And ultimately if they failed a doping test - it would have been a legitimate pathway to pursue those competitors.
In case you failed to notice, David Millar rode in many races while using EPO and did not get caught. And if Basso & Ullrich did use the services of the good Dr Fuentes, then they've raced and won many events while using PED's. So it's far from a guaranteed conclusion that they would be caught if they rode in the TdF and doped.



We'll all be watching the Tour on the friggin Knitting Channel. If we're lucky.
If they get rid of Bob Roll, it'll be worth it! :D

While it is possible that the UCI was maneuvering behind the scenes, it was the organizers of "Le Tour" who banned the riders and disinvited Astana-Wurth, based upon a list generated by the Spanish police. The Tour organizers were even willing to defy a CAS ruling that allowed A-W to ride. Ultimately, Astana-Wurth voluntarily withdrew, T-Mobile suspended Ullrich, and Riis suspended Basso, after seeing documents related to OP.


The Tour organizers did not do this. The teams agreed to suspend any rider under doping investigation. It is part of the contract they signed with the ProTour. The tour organizers may have said the riders were not welcome and could not participate but the team were obligated to suspend the riders from racing.