Ghostman

1. It should be recognized that to compete at the top of their sport, pro riders have had to consider doping over at least the past decade. Everyone else was doing it. Or at least as a rider you would think everyone else is doing it. To be competitive, you had to do it to. This is their profession, not a hobby like it is for us. To succeed, they had to do it. The top riders were all or almost all doing it. Recognize this fact and recognize that it is not a moral issue. It was a pragmatic one.

2. Having realized the above, offer Landis, Basso and anyone implicated in Puerto or any other current drug case the option of taking a 1-year suspension, after which time they are allowed back with no strings attached. Time already out of the sport would count.

3. Going forward, from this year on, adopt an extremely strict anti-doping protocol, based on the things CSC, T-Mobile and Chipotle are doing. Long term tracking studies of each rider's blood. Frequent testing with better procedural protections and better accreditation for labs. Penalties for teams and team directors. Etc Etc. All riders would have to agree. Put lots of procedural protections in place for rider disciplinary hearings (such as automatically dropping any case in which information is leaked to the press). But if a rider is caught and tried through a proper process, then 5 year ban.

4. Of course, none of this can happen because no one is in charge. That is why it is such a mess. Cycling needs a benevolent and powerful dictator like David Stern or Roger Goodall.

oboeguy

It also needs more money. The stuff you're talking about is expensive (see team Slipstream's anti-doping budget). Also, more labs, better tests, etc. In short, it sounds nice but I don't think it will happen. You're right about cycling needing David Stern, though.

stea1thviper

*yawn*

patentcad

I say test Ghostman for drugs. Not EPO, more like LSD or Crack. If only because you'd have to be stoned to think any of his logical suggestions would ever have a prayer with the UCI boneheads. Only kidding Ghostman, I do agree with much of what you say.

If the powers that be in the UCI and elsewhere in Europe had any common sense, we wouldn't have to turn to friggin BIKE FORUM POSTS for logical approaches to pro cycling's self-exacerbated doping 'crisis'.

VT Biker

Patencad: in order for this to happen though, you need to include DNA testing of samples and riders to ensure that they can match all samples with all riders. Also - you would need to include 2 independent labs (1 in the US, 1 in Europe) and all samples go to both labs. So there would be Sample A1, Sample A2 and Sample B1, Sample B2. There has to be NO question about the results. Until you get to the point where a quick response against a cheating rider can be taken without doubt, then all of the above is moot. As long as riders can mount the "reasonable doubt" arguments (which currently are legitimate), then the whole plan fails. You need to be able to make swift action, and use have fool proof evidence so that when a rider is caught, swift action can be taken, and rider KNOW that there is no way out once caught.

Finally - what good is the UCI? I mean - they want control of all the races, yet refuse to require the strict testing regimens being applied by some teams to all teams (Team Disco I am sure would put up the worst fight).

CastIron

I think it's all about money and power (what isn't anymore?). Nobody with either wants to pony up for the common good of the sport. So, lets start seeing coked out superhuman doper freaks on The Tour.

Meanwhile, perhaps it's time to push rudimentary testing down into the amateur ranks, say Cat 3 wins? Face it, if you're doping below that level you need psychological testing. Otherwise, if the powers that be really want a clean sport, they need to do it all the way. $hit or get off the pot if you will.

TheKillerPenguin

I'd really hope that people wouldn't bother doping as cat3's.

Do i have too much faith in humanity?

oboeguy

I wouldn't be surprised to hear of Cat 4 dopers. You have way too much faith.

VT Biker

I currently dope for the sunday group rides. You should see me in action. I drop noob's like there is no tomorrow.

nitropowered

I'm in favor of the anti-anti-doping plan. No matter what you do, you can't stop doping. If its allowed, the playing field will be pretty even. People will start to realize that doping may increase your ability, but at the risk of your life.

platypus

Yeah, I'm on one heck of a regimen.

gcl8a

I'll bite...

Their other option being...

Well, at least that part won't be hard.

Why? That's comical in it's absurdity.

patentcad

Yes.

Not for nothing KP, but if they sold EPO in blister packs @ Piermont Bicycle Connection, I'd be using it. Hopefully it would come with a handy syringe and instructions too.

Simoni

ummm...they do test in the pro 1 2 races. Trust me.

Part of the reason why there's not more of this in this arena is cost versus outcome. It costs more to dope than the reward for the doping.

roadwarrior

Of course there's that little issue of turning your blood to the consistency of maple syrup.

San Rensho 

My even more modest proposal, do away with all doping rules. Let them dope all they want. Darwin will take care of the ones that over-do it.

gcl8a

And Baby Jesus weeps ...

VosBike

A modest proposal without any baby-eating? that's just absurd

donrhummy

This ignores the entire problem with Floyd's case: the cyclists would have no assurances that in the future, proper protocols and honest testing is used.

pinky

Amen to that, but to be honest I really doubt a pro cyclist would be that best eating.

Re: Doping in amateur American cycling

I've heard stories of 4s doping, know of at least one 3 who has, and in the 1/2 ranks...just yes, the testing at non-NRC races is pretty close to non-existant.