Just let 'em all back in...

[40 Cent]

Ras, Vino, Ulrich, Basso, Landis, until testing is perfected and consistent, and let us get back to racing. Slipstreaming used to be frowned upon too. What's the big deal?

[Shooter]

I tend to agree. If you test positive, you're out. I can't see guys thrown out because they are "suspected" of doping or they talked to a certain doctor, or they might have thought about it. Get the tests straight & reliable & throw the proven dopers out for good.

[Helmet Head]

I tend to agree. If you test positive, you're out. I can't see guys thrown out because they are "suspected" of doping or they talked to a certain doctor, or they might have thought about it. Get the tests straight & reliable & throw the proven dopers out for good.
That's never going to happen. The riders always have an inherent technological headstart/advantage over the testers. So they also rely on certain controls to which the rider agree as part of their contracts (like agreeing to always report where they are, and agreeing to be fired if they don't do that).

[VT Biker]

I tend to agree. If you test positive, you're out. I can't see guys thrown out because they are "suspected" of doping or they talked to a certain doctor, or they might have thought about it. Get the tests straight & reliable & throw the proven dopers out for good.

You sir, are an idiot. I bet I know who wears the pants in your household.

[VT Biker]

Ras, Vino, Ulrich, Basso, Landis, until testing is perfected and consistent, and let us get back to racing. Slipstreaming used to be frowned upon too. What's the big deal?

What's the big deal?

Are you that stupid? Are you that naive?

Sponsors want NOTHING to do with doping. They are leaving the sport in droves because of the taint of doping.

It is all about the $$$, and the fans and sponsors want a clean sport. And even if the UCI was to take a "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" approach, can you imagine the crap hitting the fan everytime a rider or riders drop dead from doping? Or when an country's olympic committee bans a rider yet, that rider is allowed to ride in Pro Cycling. Do you understand what an even bigger farce that would make cycling?

[yellowjeep]

snip: the taint of doping.




:lol:

[Shooter]

You sir, are an idiot. I bet I know who wears the pants in your household.

Wow. Nice to meet you, too. Nothing like having an intelligent discussion.

[barba]

Ras, Vino, Ulrich, Basso, Landis, until testing is perfected and consistent, and let us get back to racing. Slipstreaming used to be frowned upon too. What's the big deal?

So as long as the doctors can keep a reasonable masking effort up, you are all for cheating?

[40 Cent]

What's the big deal?

Are you that stupid? Are you that naive?

Sponsors want NOTHING to do with doping. They are leaving the sport in droves because of the taint of doping.

It is all about the $$$, and the fans and sponsors want a clean sport. And even if the UCI was to take a "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" approach, can you imagine the crap hitting the fan everytime a rider or riders drop dead from doping? Or when an country's olympic committee bans a rider yet, that rider is allowed to ride in Pro Cycling. Do you understand what an even bigger farce that would make cycling?

What are you, their mother? Cycling has always been an outlandish farce to people who don't understand it. Making it through 3 weeks of cycling, in that amount of time, has rarely been possible without chemical help, either to kill the pain or out-dope the field. Screw the olympics. They don't know crap. All your worry to have it taken seriously is grandmotherly. Let them perfect testing but in the meantime, let's get on with racing.

[late]

Reality check...
drugs have always been a part of the Tour. They aren't going away.
Americans see bike racing as a clean healthy sport. Europeans (the guys who have been doing it) know better. It's more like American pro football where drugs and injuries
take out most players after a few years and without making much money.

That also is not going to change. It's a dangerous sport and only the elite get the
big paycheck.

So the question in my mind is, fine, now what?

I don't have an answer. I do know that I have no interest in following a tour
like this one. I don't want to watch it, I don't even want to hear about it.

[richard_dupp]

Sponsors want NOTHING to do with doping. They are leaving the sport in droves because of the taint of doping.

It is all about the $$$, and the fans and sponsors want a clean sport. And even if the UCI was to take a "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" approach, can you imagine the crap hitting the fan everytime a rider or riders drop dead from doping? Or when an country's olympic committee bans a rider yet, that rider is allowed to ride in Pro Cycling. Do you understand what an even bigger farce that would make cycling?

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but I wonder why that is the case in cycling, but pro football, basketball, baseball or insert your sport here, seems exempt from the same. Why is it that doping in cycling seems to be a capital offense, and rightly so, but NOT in other pro sports?

[40 Cent]

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but I wonder why that is the case in cycling, but pro football, basketball, baseball or insert your sport here, seems exempt from the same. Why is it that doping in cycling seems to be a capital offense, and rightly so, but NOT in other pro sports?

Maybe the perception that it's an individual sport and that dope by itself gives an otherwise losing team a win -- a perception that may have some truth to it. Barry Bonds' dope by itself hasn't let the Giants dominate so perhaps there's less concern. Just trying out a theory.

[bac]

Are you that stupid?

Must we attack even off the bike? Come on folks, please have some respect for BikeForums and your fellow cyclists.

... Brad

[VT Biker]

Not agreeing or disagreeing, but I wonder why that is the case in cycling, but pro football, basketball, baseball or insert your sport here, seems exempt from the same. Why is it that doping in cycling seems to be a capital offense, and rightly so, but NOT in other pro sports?

Richard,

the reason cycling is affected by the PED and doping scandals is because the revenue of the teams and the races are all derived from sponsors. There are no ticket sales, beer sales, radio and television sales (for the teams) for revenue. In addition, unlike say the Boston Red Sox, there is not a vast region of loyal fans willing to look past the doping.

Cycling fans have their favorites, but it is more an appreciation than a fanatical loyalty. In addition, since the teams change so often, becoming loyal to a team that may fold in 5 years is not worth most of our time.

Since cycling fans are more fickle, and since all revenue is derived from the "goodwill" and "publicity" a sponsor gets from having both their image displayed on television as well as their name associated with an athlete or sport, the sport is much more sensitive to doping. And when I state fickle, I do not mean fans will abandon the sport, but we will quickly dump any support for a team who we deem to be cheats. Look at Astana. How many of us were enjoying and rooting for Astana to continue their attacks to make the Tour interesting. But once Vino was caught, most of us tossed them overboard like chum.

But if the Red Sox were to have been found to be using steroids, how many Sox fans would abandon the team, or would instead, either apologize for the players or stop rooting for the individuals, but still support the team.



Finally, had Barry Bonds not been using steroids ("alledgedly"), wouldn't you think the chase for Hank Aaron's record would be a national obsession. I know of almost no one who cares about this record, the second most hallowed record in all of sports (behind HR's in a season), in the nation that invented the game and is still the biggest fans of the game. So when people say that the drug epidemic in sports is impacting cycling more than other sports, I agree to some extent, but people are overlooking the impact on baseball in particular.