Professional Cycling For the Fans - Tour de France Cancelled for 2007

"The Tour de France has been cancelled for 2007". That headline has not been in the "New York Times" (yet), but THAT might be what it takes to save pro cycling.

The Tour de France is a bit like the "Kentucky Derby". It is the race that even non-fans follow and respect. If the organizers of the Tour de France have the courage to cancel the Tour for 2007, it would be the shock that would finally force the pro peloton to clean up its act.

It is difficult to see how any respectable organization can sponsor a team the is under a cloud of suspicion. Nor can fans root for a rider that possibly/probably is both a cheat and a criminal. So, it is time to cancel the Tour.

Of course, fans may just chose to cancel the Tour in their OWN way. What if they have a Tour, and nobody cares who wins?

I do not agree. Is that really fair to fans and to the few rider out their who are not cheating? And really, that would destroy pro cycling - fans would be upset by the race being cancelled and the rest would decide that if cycling has gotten that bad its not worth their time. Just my opinion, it would be a bad idea.

besides, if fans are really that upset they should stop watching it. It's like complaining about concession prices at the ballbark but buying a beer because you don't think you can go w/o it - if you support you can't complain

Nice little gimmick to get people to read the thread.:rolleyes:
It will not be cancelled -- short of a World War.

Hey! That's a great idea.

Why don't we just destroy one of the mainstays of sport over the world. In fact, screw the Olympics, World Cups, World Series and Super Bowl too.

Hey! That's a great idea.

Why don't we just destroy one of the mainstays of sport over the world. In fact, screw the Olympics, World Cups, World Series and Super Bowl too.

AMEN!!!!:rolleyes:

Right now, there is not a single team planning to participate in the 2007 Tour de France where the team directors, coaches, and doctors could pass a lie detector test as to one simple question: "Is every rider on your team riding 'clean'?"

Perhaps there are members of the Bike Forums who are interested in a Tour de France that is a contest to prove which team has the most clever ways of cheating. I am not one of them. The Tour should be canceled until everyone involved can truthfully say that it is a race to find the best rider, not a race to find the best (cheating/lying/law breaking) doctor.

Right now, there is not a single team planning to participate in the 2007 Tour de France where the team directors, coaches, and doctors could pass a lie detector test as to one simple question: "Is every rider on your team riding 'clean'?"

Perhaps there are members of the Bike Forums who are interested in a Tour de France that is a contest to prove which team has the most clever ways of cheating. I am not one of them. The Tour should be canceled until everyone involved can truthfully say that it is a race to find the best rider, not a race to find the best (cheating/lying/law breaking) doctor.

you act as if cheating in bike racing is a recent phenomenon.

now that you are aware that there's widespread cheating in the sport you want it to stop and you are willing to cancel perhaps the greatest sporting event on the planet to get your way.

i say let's try to put the genie back in the bottle and let 'em dope because the best riders really do win that way.

and if occasionally one of these guys drop dead prematurely that's show business ... and no different from any other sport :eek: .

ed rader

... "Is every rider on your team riding 'clean'?"...

Even if they were, there'd be no way to prove it.

I'm with ed. The show will go on.

i say let's try to put the genie back in the bottle and let 'em dope because the best riders really do win that way.

and if occasionally one of these guys drop dead prematurely that's show business ... and no different from any other sport :eek: .



ed , I'd have to say that I think that's a sad attitude to hold. Do you condone cheating? because that's what drug taking in sport IS: be it cycling or football or baseball or even, god forbid, taking beta blockers as a darts player to stop your hand shaking.

condoning cheating in sport means you probably condone cheating in all other walks of life, like with your taxes, at your kid's school, even on your wife. you can't separate one from the other, at least in most respectable moral systems, including your much-vaunted American Christianity.

That comment is directed at the world's most famous Mennonite too.

I refer you to the NHL. Cancelling the flag ship event of the sport would be the end of the sport for many of the small American fan base. we'd get distracted and move on.

The Tour should be canceled until everyone involved can truthfully say that it is a race to find the best rider, not a race to find the best (cheating/lying/law breaking) doctor.
Brilliant plan.

While we're at it, let's also cancel the Superbowl, the World Series, the NBA post-season, the US Open, the Olympics, and a couple of World Cups too.

Do you really think that cycling is the only sport with a wide-spread doping problem?

They should just establish too classes for TdF racers, 'clean' and 'open' class. Let the open class riders dope anyway they want to....

I refer you to the NHL. Cancelling the flag ship event of the sport would be the end of the sport for many of the small American fan base. we'd get distracted and move on.
I thought about that, too, but then thought about baseball and the cancelation of the 1994 World Series. A decade or so later and it has only led to higher attendance in ballparks.

Sometimes the event is bigger than the things that conspire to kill it off.

As the old saying goes, it's the Tour that makes the rider, not the other way around.

ed , I'd have to say that I think that's a sad attitude to hold. Do you condone cheating? because that's what drug taking in sport IS: be it cycling or football or baseball or even, god forbid, taking beta blockers as a darts player to stop your hand shaking.
if you don't cheat, you're out of a job. Period. Forget about winning, you can't even show up for work. Change the rules because they are unenforceable.

Canceling the tour de france because of all the scandals of doping is like canceling baseball steroids...and that hasnt happend

Cancelling the premier event in the sport worked wonders for Hockey. Wonder if that sport will ever recover.

Tour de France is not like athletics, where people want to see records being broken.

Here, all people want to see is drama, epic fights between champions in the mountains, leaders collapsing, outsiders being discovered. Even without the top50 of PRO cycling present, viewers will love to watch it. Good thing is the organisers are not bound to the PRO Team setup, basically they can invite/kick out whoever they like (under UCI regulations).

"Let the games begin"

Tour de France is not like athletics, where people want to see records being broken.

Here, all people want to see is drama, epic fights between champions in the mountains, leaders collapsing, outsiders being discovered. Even without the top50 of PRO cycling present, viewers will love to watch it. Good thing is the organisers are not bound to the PRO Team setup, basically they can invite/kick out whoever they like (under UCI regulations).

Depends why the top 50 are not there. Busted for drugs, sick or otherwise unable to compete fine. They are not the best anymore. But a strike like baseball, nope then it is the Tour de Scab and most would not care. The TDF is the big event because it attracts the best year in and year out. If it were for the drama then the Giro and Vuelta would have the larger following. Many of the Tours have frankly been boring with conservative riding.

... Do you condone cheating? because that's what drug taking in sport IS:
...

Only if it's against the rules. And yes, I know it is in cycling's case.

Why not allow it? If everyone starts doing it, it levels the playing field. If they're all doping, there's no advantage to doping, and no one can say "He only won because he was doping". They may say that he only posted such a good time by doping, however.

FTR, I'm not trying to push anyone's buttons, it's an honest question.

dave

There are numerous reasons not to allow it:

Paternalistic:
1. It is in the best interest of the riders not to take drugs which impair their health.

Think of the children:
1. It sets a poor example for other people who may look up to the athletes.
2. It devalues the aspect of hard work in favor of "quick-fixes" (and yes I know you have to train also)

For the sport:
1. It means that pro-cycling is no longer approachable by common people. We all harbor dreams of being a pro-racer (Merckx, Armstrong, Indurian...); but now instead of convincing/fooling myself I could just succeed if I got out from behind a desk and rode my bike all the time, now I have to do that and learn about chemistry and stick myself with needles. This, more than anything else, will destroy the fan base.
2. It forces the choice of drugs onto everyone who competes.
3. It adds another variable that is not related to athletic ability to determining the end result. (Now I have to evaluate some secret drug regimen in addition to the bike and the athlete.)

Philosophically
1. If we are going to allow chemical modifications, why not add motors, call it motorcycle racing and be done with it?

These problems are going to arise, just wait til mechanical limbs start popping up on formerly crippled cyclists like is happening in sprinting.

you act as if cheating in bike racing is a recent phenomenon. . . and if occasionally one of these guys drop dead prematurely that's show business ... and no different from any other sport :eek: .

ed rader

Cheating in one form or another has been part of The Tour since its inception (think broken glass and tacks tossed onto the road by fans trying to foil a competitor, cocaine and amphetimine ingestion, cigarettes to "open the lungs", alcohol to "thin the blood".) Testing wasn't begun until 1968 or so (after Tom Simpson collapsed and died during a stage), much to the mighty protest of the peleton of the day

While I don't condone dishonesty in any form, I'm also not naive enough to think that cheating/doping is not going to continue. What's the answer? I have no idea. But just as the Prohibition was enacted to reduce the consumption of alcohol and it's related debauchery, the opposite was the result.

B

Only because I enjoy playing devil's advocate :D


There are numerous reasons not to allow it:

Paternalistic:
1. It is in the best interest of the riders not to take drugs which impair their health.
Riders are adults, they can choose what to do to their body.



Think of the children:
1. It sets a poor example for other people who may look up to the athletes.
2. It devalues the aspect of hard work in favor of "quick-fixes" (and yes I know you have to train also)
This happens now. At least the children wouldn't be lied to until their hero gets busted for doping.



For the sport:
1. It means that pro-cycling is no longer approachable by common people. We all harbor dreams of being a pro-racer (Merckx, Armstrong, Indurian...); but now instead of convincing/fooling myself I could just succeed if I got out from behind a desk and rode my bike all the time, now I have to do that and learn about chemistry and stick myself with needles. This, more than anything else, will destroy the fan base.
2. It forces the choice of drugs onto everyone who competes.
3. It adds another variable that is not related to athletic ability to determining the end result. (Now I have to evaluate some secret drug regimen in addition to the bike and the athlete.)
1. Is the current doping controversy less destructive to the fan base?
2. It could be argued that they already are.
3. I can't argue that.



Philosophically
1. If we are going to allow chemical modifications, why not add motors, call it motorcycle racing and be done with it?
Because then it's not cycling. Doping cyclists are still cyclists.



These problems are going to arise, just wait til mechanical limbs start popping up on formerly crippled cyclists like is happening in sprinting. Sprinters with mechanical limbs are still considerably slower than world class sprinters. Plus, bionics are really easy to test for.

BTW, great response. Very well thought out. More than I expected.

if you don't cheat, you're out of a job. Period. Forget about winning, you can't even show up for work. Change the rules because they are unenforceable.


Well, i think that's a losers' attitude. i have never cheated in school or in work, and here i am at a great job, which i got by relying on my brains and natural talents. OK, occasionally i don't tell the taxman about everything i earn, but hey, i'm not perfect. Why not the same in sport, at all levels? because some people are not happy with the fact that they ARE NOT as good as someone else, and they can't handle that feeling of loss, so they cheat to get better. it's only a F'n sport, for crying out loud.

and if nobody dopes, it is a level playing field too, right? it is the slow creep of attitudes like yours that has got us into this mess, and has made the job of pro cycling that much harder to master: think of all the extra **** to go through.

and i know that there have been cheats in the TdF since day one, but that's the point: we still think they're cheats, and we don't like it, and we have less respect for them. like i have less respect for Zabel, Basso, Flandis, and I suspect it of Lance too... pretty much anyone who has been in contact with that quack ferrari. I still look up to Pantani tho, cause the dude was truly an animal climber, but with lots less respect than he once got...

Riders are adults, they can choose what to do to their body.
It's fairly routine for governments and other organizations to regulate medicinal uses. Plenty of substances are banned from use, so there does not seem to be any sort of universal right to ingest any medicine you please....



This happens now. At least the children wouldn't be lied to until their hero gets busted for doping.
So I guess you told your kids about the myth of Santa Claus when they were 2, right? :D

Anyway, wide-spread rule violations should not result in revoking the rules. If there was a wide-spread rash of baseball players who were taking bets and throwing games to make their bets, should we then allow players to bet on games?



Sprinters with mechanical limbs are still considerably slower than world class sprinters. Plus, bionics are really easy to test for.
Actually, there is currently a sprinter with two prosthetic legs (Oscar Pistorius), and they are trying to figure out if the prostheses do in fact provide him with a mechanical advantage. For the moment, I believe the IOC is saying it's an advantage and barring him from competition....

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/15/sports/othersports/15runner.html?ex=1180756800&en=9a517a946dc3f6a8&ei=5070

Edit: it's the IAAF, not IOC, currently hashing it out.

Well, i think that's a losers' attitude. i have never cheated in school or in work, and here i am at a great job, which i got by relying on my brains and natural talents. OK, occasionally i don't tell the taxman about everything i earn, but hey, i'm not perfect. Why not the same in sport, at all levels? because some people are not happy with the fact that they ARE NOT as good as someone else, and they can't handle that feeling of loss, so they cheat to get better. it's only a F'n sport, for crying out loud.

Actually, it's their job, and that's what I was referring to when I wrote that. Read what the Telekom/T-Mobile team riders have recently admitted - they were told point blank by their team doc's that if they didn't use, they would probably not have their contracts renewed because of lackluster results.


and if nobody dopes, it is a level playing field too, right? it is the slow creep of attitudes like yours that has got us into this mess, and has made the job of pro cycling that much harder to master: think of all the extra **** to go through.

If no one in the field uses, then yes, it's a perfectly level playing field as well. You say it's attitudes like mine that got us into this mess?! You are 180* wrong. It's the attitude that drugs need to be kept out of pro sports that has caused this mess. Where is all of the drama in World's Strongest Man? Why isn't that sport collapsing in front of our eyes. Maybe it's because everyone is taking drugs but WSM doesn't care. The media doesn't care, the athletes don't care, the viewers don't care. In short, NO ONE CARES maybe because IT ISN'T AGAINST THE RULES!

As it stands today, the anti-doping rules in cycling cannot be enforced sufficiently to guarantee drugfree competitions. This is 100% fact. And now you see the results of this fact.

...like i have less respect for Zabel, Basso, Flandis, and I suspect it of Lance too... pretty much anyone who has been in contact with that quack ferrari. I still look up to Pantani tho, cause the dude was truly an animal climber, but with lots less respect than he once got...
Ok, let me get this straight. You disrespect guys who were effectively using a medically established protocol to enhance performance yet praise a coke addict. Yeah, that's f'n brilliant!

Cancelling the premier event in the sport worked wonders for Hockey. Wonder if that sport will ever recover.

what's hockey?

There are numerous reasons not to allow it:

Paternalistic:
1. It is in the best interest of the riders not to take drugs which impair their health.
Actually, the majority of the drugs in question here - the ones used by Fuentes - were TREATING health conditions, not impairing them. The only one in the protocol remotely dangerous was EPO/blood doping. If used responsibly, blood doping is extremely safe. FDA recently released some bad data regarding Epogen, so EPO might have some adverse longterm consequences - just have to wait and see on that one.


Think of the children:
1. It sets a poor example for other people who may look up to the athletes.
2. It devalues the aspect of hard work in favor of "quick-fixes" (and yes I know you have to train also)

Everyone always tries to tie these two together. I would like to know the answer to this question: How is a high school kid in South Dakota going to learn what these guys are using? Do you think Floyd Landis is just going to dial up a random SD telephone # and say, "Hey bro, I'm using 50mg/day of transdermal T, 1.2 IU's of hGH 6 days on 1 day off, 10IU's 3x daily of insulin, 60mcg of IGF-1/daily, and 100mg/wk of Primobolan in the off season." Give me a break. None of this doping information would ever get out if drug testing disappeared. The guys would keep it to themselves and no one would know the truth, just like we never knew all of our MLB idols were using speed back in the day. If that didn't come out in the congressional baseball hearings, I would never have known that. Now, THE WHOLE WORLD KNOWS IT.


For the sport:
1. It means that pro-cycling is no longer approachable by common people. We all harbor dreams of being a pro-racer (Merckx, Armstrong, Indurian...); but now instead of convincing/fooling myself I could just succeed if I got out from behind a desk and rode my bike all the time, now I have to do that and learn about chemistry and stick myself with needles. This, more than anything else, will destroy the fan base.
2. It forces the choice of drugs onto everyone who competes.
3. It adds another variable that is not related to athletic ability to determining the end result. (Now I have to evaluate some secret drug regimen in addition to the bike and the athlete.)

#1 - Please tell me how you would have learned what these guys were doing if no drug testing was implemented. Until you reach that level of competition, you won't know what's really going on.

#2 - It does not force drugs onto everyone. Anyone who wants to WIN will have to take drugs. Some will even have to use in order to have a job. But that is not any different than it is today. Actually, any rider with half a brain would WANT to use some of these drugs simply to treat the adverse medical conditions created by racing the TdF.

#3 - These drugs have been around for decades and the people who need to know about them, know A LOT about them. There are no secrets. I've used them for years personally. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure a lot of this stuff out on your own. Start with the prescribing information and periodic bloodwork and you've already got 90% of it done.


Philosophically
1. If we are going to allow chemical modifications, why not add motors, call it motorcycle racing and be done with it?
Because a motor is doing the work for the athlete. I've never seen a bottle of testosterone climb Alpe d'Huez. These guys are doing all of the work. The drugs are not turning the pedals. They simply allow the athlete to perform more effectively. If you don't put your time in, you will get nothing from them - even Zabel admitted this publicly.

It's fairly routine for governments and other organizations to regulate medicinal uses. Plenty of substances are banned from use, so there does not seem to be any sort of universal right to ingest any medicine you please....
Actually that is incorrect in the U.S., as it is in many other "western" countries. The U.S. govt. cannot drug test you as a private citizen without a criminal record and use the results of that test to incriminate you. That is a violation of your right to privacy. Therefore, the only way to regulate medical use of controlled substances is via possession laws. In other western countries, you can possess most of these drugs legally even without a prescription - you simply cannot "distribute."


Anyway, wide-spread rule violations should not result in revoking the rules. If there was a wide-spread rash of baseball players who were taking bets and throwing games to make their bets, should we then allow players to bet on games?

Agree 100% What SHOULD result in revoking the rules is the fact that the technology to perfectly and completely enforce said rules does not exist. THAT is why the rules should be revoked.

Where is all of the drama in World's Strongest Man? Why isn't that sport collapsing in front of our eyes. Maybe it's because everyone is taking drugs but WSM doesn't care. The media doesn't care, the athletes don't care, the viewers don't care. In short, NO ONE CARES maybe because IT ISN'T AGAINST THE RULES!

Are you really pointing to a freak show which only exists because most of it's viewers find it amusing to watch big scandanavians with funny names do stupid **** as a direction in which cycling should move?

Absolutely not! The two sports are at the complete opposite ends of the spectrum. Also, last time I checked, an American won the event in 2006 (first time in what, 30 years since Kaz?), so it's not just the big blondes who are participating.

The fact of the matter is that cycling would never turn into a "freak show" as you put it because there is a point of diminshing returns - actually NEGATIVE returns - when it comes to PED's and TdF racing. Actually, nothing would change since the whole field is using already. My point is none of this drama exists in non tested sports. Guys aren't "retiring" because of doping allegations. This is pure stupidity. Most of the big names are now gone, and that adversely affects my viewing entertainment.

I thought about that, too, but then thought about baseball and the cancelation of the 1994 World Series. A decade or so later and it has only led to higher attendance in ballparks.

Although many attribute the recovery to the 'roid-fueled slugfests of McGwire and Sosa... I wonder how long it would have taken baseball to recover from the '94 shutdown in the absence of PEDs?

^^^That's a great point. As I sit here thinking about that era, baseball was definitely DOA for years after that fiasco. McGwire v. Sosa brought back real entertainment value for sure.

Legalize doping. Pro cycling is already an expensive sport. What's another 100 large per year to keep the team "enhanced"?

Man, did I open a can of worms. :p


...
Actually, nothing would change since the whole field is using already. My point is none of this drama exists in non tested sports. ...


I totally agree with this sentiment. In my own clumsy way, it's the point I was trying to make.

#1 - Please tell me how you would have learned what these guys were doing if no drug testing was implemented. Until you reach that level of competition, you won't know what's really going on.

Have you ever competed in high school or collegiate sports or known anyone training for just about anything that requires high levels of dedication young (Olympic-aspirants?), especially football or something similar? Let us just say that you can find out what the pros use pretty easily. Or even worse, you get sold stuff that is "just like Lance uses" but really isn't (and no, I am not debating whether Lance takes drugs, more how this stuff is marketed).


#2 - It does not force drugs onto everyone. Anyone who wants to WIN will have to take drugs. Some will even have to use in order to have a job. But that is not any different than it is today. Actually, any rider with half a brain would WANT to use some of these drugs simply to treat the adverse medical conditions created by racing the TdF.

Just because it is happening doesn't mean it is right. And the adverse conditions may be part of a long-term career in cycling, i.e., it is part of career strategy whether to burn yourself out early or try and make it long term. You don't think that Tiger Woods probably uses a bit safer swing than he is capable of to preserve his game longer, or that quarterbacks and pitchers do the same? Yes, nothing is forced, as in nobody is forcing you to take a career in pro-cycling, but if your job required you to take drugs and inject yourself, you might do so as you apparently do for cycling, but other people would not appreciate it (imagine being forced to take Ritalin and Provigil just to stay up for days straight and focus singlemindedly to do a desk job).


#3 - These drugs have been around for decades and the people who need to know about them, know A LOT about them. There are no secrets. I've used them for years personally. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure a lot of this stuff out on your own. Start with the prescribing information and periodic bloodwork and you've already got 90% of it done.

Not all the drugs are old and have been around for so long, and they are unregulated. I am not so sure that full safety profiles, etc. are done on all illegal performance enhancers that are out there. The designer stuff coming out of labs I am sure is not regulated to any extent. BTW, you know what the pros are doing apparently, so your point #1 isn't quite true; otherwise are you a pro? It would be rather foolish to admit use on a public board.


Because a motor is doing the work for the athlete. I've never seen a bottle of testosterone climb Alpe d'Huez. These guys are doing all of the work. The drugs are not turning the pedals. They simply allow the athlete to perform more effectively. If you don't put your time in, you will get nothing from them - even Zabel admitted this publicly.

They allow the athlete to do things they would not otherwise be capable of. Just like attaching a small little motor to the bottom of the bike would.

Have you ever competed in high school or collegiate sports or known anyone training for just about anything that requires high levels of dedication young (Olympic-aspirants?), especially football or something similar? Let us just say that you can find out what the pros use pretty easily. Or even worse, you get sold stuff that is "just like Lance uses" but really isn't (and no, I am not debating whether Lance takes drugs, more how this stuff is marketed).
see my answer below for my story. About your point here, drugs are more embedded in some sports than others. I think it's rather odd that the examples you list are all drug tested. Yet, apparently, you seem to believe that these people are all still using and just not getting caught. I happen to agree with that position 100%. However, my point is that the whole world knows what someone is using in the rare instance that someone does get caught. The substance is named, the B sample gets tested, the athlete appeals, etc. It's an endless stream of media driven information. If all of this just went away and these guys were allowed to use whatever they wanted, none of this information would ever be disclosed in this manner. I am heavily involved in the strength and physique community, yet I have never once heard 3-time WSM (nontested sport) Mariusz Pudzianowski disclose how many Omnadren amps he was shooting per week.


Not all the drugs are old and have been around for so long, and they are unregulated. I am not so sure that full safety profiles, etc. are done on all illegal performance enhancers that are out there. The designer stuff coming out of labs I am sure is not regulated to any extent. BTW, you know what the pros are doing apparently, so your point #1 isn't quite true; otherwise are you a pro? It would be rather foolish to admit use on a public board.
Yes, I am a pro, just not in cycling. I've competed professionally in the sport of powerlifting and have achieved international success, so I do know what I'm talking about. I agree 100% with your assessment on the "designer" anabolics. Nobody knows anything about them. Interestingly, it's drug testing and the scheduling of anabolic androgenic steroids that prompted the creation of these drugs. If nandrolone, which has been on the market for 40 years, was neither tested for nor a controlled substance, then everyone would be using that instead of Methyl-1-T. Absence of knowledge is definitely not the case with transdermal testosterone, rDNA hGH, insulin, IGF-1, or EPO, however. These are the drugs at the heart of the discussion here - the same one's used by Fuentes. The strength community has been using these same drugs for decades. The amount of publicly available information surrounding them is staggering.


They allow the athlete to do things they would not otherwise be capable of. Just like attaching a small little motor to the bottom of the bike would.
Agreed, but they are still the ones doing the work, not the motor.

"The Tour de France is a bit like the "Kentucky Derby". It is the race that even non-fans follow and respect.

You do know that the horses are doped don't you?

...
Just because it is happening doesn't mean it is right.
...

Right how? And by whose definition? Should the riders get to decide what they do or the spectators?


...
(imagine being forced to take Ritalin and Provigil just to stay up for days straight and focus singlemindedly to do a desk job).
...

If someone was given that ultimatum, and they really wanted\needed the job, do you think they would? I had friends that was working for a company that expected a ridiculous amount of extra hours put in by employees. They would foster that behaviour by ordering in food from a really expensive restaurant, and keeping a stocked fridge with free snacks and beverages. My friends left, but they were there for a year before they had enough, a lot of people stayed longer.

Also, I don't think anyone said anything about forcing riders to dope, just that they should have the option if they feel they need it.



...
Not all the drugs are old and have been around for so long, and they are unregulated.
...

Doping agencies are always playing catchup with the dopers. WADA and the like are at least one generation of drugs behind. Who knows what people are taking now, or what the side effects are.


Dave

There are numerous reasons not to allow it:

Paternalistic:
1. It is in the best interest of the riders not to take drugs which impair their health.

Think of the children:
1. It sets a poor example for other people who may look up to the athletes.
2. It devalues the aspect of hard work in favor of "quick-fixes" (and yes I know you have to train also)

For the sport:
1. It means that pro-cycling is no longer approachable by common people. We all harbor dreams of being a pro-racer (Merckx, Armstrong, Indurian...); but now instead of convincing/fooling myself I could just succeed if I got out from behind a desk and rode my bike all the time, now I have to do that and learn about chemistry and stick myself with needles. This, more than anything else, will destroy the fan base.
2. It forces the choice of drugs onto everyone who competes.
3. It adds another variable that is not related to athletic ability to determining the end result. (Now I have to evaluate some secret drug regimen in addition to the bike and the athlete.)

Philosophically
1. If we are going to allow chemical modifications, why not add motors, call it motorcycle racing and be done with it?

These problems are going to arise, just wait til mechanical limbs start popping up on formerly crippled cyclists like is happening in sprinting.

Well, I'm personally not in favor of drugs of any kind. However, everywhere you turn there is a new drug to treat this or that. So...isn't it kind of hipocritical to try to ban doping when doctors and drug companies are prescribing meds for every sniffle and sneeze or ounce of pain?? Why not allow it but regulate the levels? Not saying it's right, but just a thought.

Well, I'm personally not in favor of drugs of any kind. However, everywhere you turn there is a new drug to treat this or that. So...isn't it kind of hipocritical to try to ban doping when doctors and drug companies are prescribing meds for every sniffle and sneeze or ounce of pain?? Why not allow it but regulate the levels? Not saying it's right, but just a thought.

That would not really solve the issue. People will just take more secretly and it will be that much harder to test for it.

That would not really solve the issue. People will just take more secretly and it will be that much harder to test for it.
I can tell that either you have never used these drugs or you have used them and you are not a cyclist. As I've already written in another thread, the application of drugs like androgens, synthetic anabolics, hGH, and EPO are all self-limiting in TdF racing. You cannot get away with increasing dosages to get more effect because the physiological side effects would undermine your cardiovascular conditioning.

Right now, there is not a single team planning to participate in the 2007 Tour de France where the team directors, coaches, and doctors could pass a lie detector test as to one simple question: "Is every rider on your team riding 'clean'?"


Same could most likely be said for ANY top level professional sports team in the world if tested to the same scrutiny as cycling...your point?

It's these EPOrs ruin the game,God bless them,Amen!!
Just as Lance Armstrong said on the award stage in Champs-Elysees in 2005,vive le tour,forever.

The tour is a cycling club for drug addicts.

Wait... Hold the presses....

You mean there are riders who aren't cheating?

The organizers of the Tour have announced that each rider must sign a "pledge" before the race starts that if they fail a drug test, they will agree to forfeit one year's salary. So far, not many riders have signed. Those that don't sign, can't ride.

Why are the riders resisting signing? They may suspect that a few hours before the race starts, they ALL will be tested...and this year, failing the test will have consequences.

So, if only twenty or thirty riders sign the pledge and then PASS any pre-race testing, would the Tour be held this year? I somehow can't see a Tour with only 30 riders. And, there may not be a hundred pro riders willing to sign the pledge who can then pass a drug test.

So, indeed, the 2007 Tour de France may yet be cancelled.

if you don't cheat, you're out of a job. Period. Forget about winning, you can't even show up for work. Change the rules because they are unenforceable.

I don't agree with your statement. There are plenty of athletes in all sports that compete clean. Unfortunately cheating is a part of life, whether in sports, business, or school there will always be those looking for short cuts and in the end they have their reward. Most cheaters are eventually caught or their cheating eventually catches up to them and they are placed in a situation when they will regret not doing things the right way.

Everyones on drugs these days, the pharmy companies took alook at the street drug scene years ago and now have a big piece of the action, without interference of the pesky law. And just look at all the wonderfull dope availible from your corner doctor!
I say , let them drink Drano if they can go faster! Better Living Through Chemistry!

Don