I think the point isn't about differentiating between "pro" and "amateur", but, that there is a degree of care that must be exercised to remain "clean" that is far beyond what most of us would consider 'normal'. I would hazard a guess that the more than 50% of us on this board would test positive for a banned substance. Even higher in the 50+ forum.

Read the article I linked to. It starts to get you thinking about what it means to be clean.

Not at all. Why would you even begin to think that I am?

Well, that last line echoed a quote from Dick Pound in the Four Corners documentary as he was telling what Verbruggen said to him.

Thanks -- that was a good article.

I especially like his closing line:
'Professional athletes may dope to enhance their job, and you may too to enhance yours even if you’re an accountant simply trying to stay focused. I say you’re one in the same."

So, how much difference is there between caffeine for the accountant and EPO for the athlete? They're both drugs. They can both enhance performance if used appropriately -- and they can both kill you if abused...

I'm unfamilliar with Dick's statetement. If you can link to it I'll give it a read. I've never been a fan of his.

But, if there's any similarity, maybe that's because there is some truth to it?

We (the fans) are after all what fuels the professional cycling. If we didn't follow it, there would be no interest from the sponsors and subsequently no money involved or possibility of making a living from it. But, what is morbid, is that we are attracted by and insist upon the destruction of our cycling gladiators. With helicopters and motorcycles covering every second of each stage, no longer are we happy with the idea that they (the riders) speed through town and past the photographers, contesting the climbs to determine who is the strongest, but, recovering as a group between efforts. No, they must race from the gun. We aren't happy when the peleton is 'controlled' by a team(s) and quickly condemn it as the most boring Tour,Giro,Vuelta ever. We expect attacks, ad nauseum. And harder and harder climbs. The Giro continues to add to it's torturous aspects in an attempt to gain increased spectator interest and we oblige.

We expect our gladiator to duel to the death. But, react in disgust when we see that they're pulling blows or attempting to extend their 'careers'.

We have a bunch (a peleton) of professional cyclist that we expect to put on a show for us day after day, week after week. They train in order to do the best job they can. They train to the point that they're bodies may or may not be able to repair themselves each day. They damage themselves for our enjoyment. For this, they are compensated, with a few exceptions, not greatly. They desire to maximize their earnings and extend their careers as long as they can. They are a small group/profession of only a few hundred in the entire world. They know each other. VERY WELL. They eat, sleep, train, compete and recover together. They move from employer to employer as circumstances dictate and will very posibly work with today, those that they competed against yesterday.

So, lets not fool ourselves when they ask us to extend to them the courtesy of not ratting out their former coworkers, colleagues or competitors.

We fuel the machine that demands that they attempt to destroy each other on a daily basis. We will be statisfied by nothing less than seeing broken men lying on the side of mountain Cols. It's the way it has been for a long time and our calls for them to break each other more definatively and with less chance of ever recovering should not be held up as some sort of altruistic grail. We don't 'care' for them after they are broken.

They put on a show. We buy the tickets and cheer. They pay the price. It's a story that is thousands of years old.

Let the riders declare to what degree they would like to see the sport cleaned up. I suspect that if you sat them around a table and asked for a set of rules and procedures that we could expect them to adhere to, it would provide them with the opportunity to recover from and continue to particpate in the torture/entertainment that we expect for as long as they are able to do so.

Change "accountant" to truck driver or miner or someone else involved in an industry that relies on good judgment for the safety of the individual and colleagues, and you will find this analogy is BS.

Drug and alcohol testing prior to employment in these industries is becoming an important weeding-out mechanism. Failure rates among applicants is known to be over 50% in many cases.

It was in this video documentary: https://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stori...11/3608613.htm
I don't if there is a transcript anywhere.

So the pro riders can't set up their own union (ooohhh, that dirty socialist/communist word...).

The ice hockey players have done it and closed down their sport (whether you agree with their motives or not).

If the riders feel that strongly about being put through their GT tortures, they can do the same (and in fact, have done so on a number of stages of GT events).

I've said in the Pro forum that maybe this needs a reassessment of the types of races the GTs are. It may need to be part of an entire strip-down of the sport, and a rebuilding into something that's meaningful.

There also is a grassroots elements here. Everyone who is a member of a national cycling organisation that is affiliated with the UCI has a voice. Maybe they should start using it.

I beleive the analogy wasn't an attempt to justify the use of drugs by athletes so much as it was an attempt to point out that many of us are little different with regard to our acceptance of various drugs in our lives. And while we wouldn't accept a truck driver on methamphetamines we don't blink an eyelash to him having a cup of coffee before he gets behind the wheel.

If true, the 50% failure rate would just further support that a large percentage of the population are on something, either performance enhancing or performance degrading. But, on something all the same.

Huh???
Do some googling for "employment drug testing failure rates", and you get things like this:
https://www.postandcourier.com/articl...1603/309229908

"Quest Diagnostics, a national drug testing company, released its annual report on national drug testing this month. In 2010, less than 2 percent of pre-employment tests were positive for drugs nationally, the report said."

I think the riders actions over the years are very telling. When a bunch of guys who have already given in to doping are then say, "NO, that is too hard. We can not do that" it really does suggest that a rebalancing of what drives the sport needs to occur.

While history demonstrates that even smallish local one day events can be subjected to doping abuse, it is the GT's that bring big money, to big teams and really reward the systematic approach to doping that was epitomized by USPS/Disco.

Could easily be explained as the difference between "some cases" and a national lab's average.

I personally watched a company loose over 1/3 and close 1/2 of its staff when it implemented a mandatory policy. I also watched a foreign arm of a multi national refuse to implement a policy because of the known loss rate they would suffer. At one point a depart of 30 was reasonably sure that they would have no more than 6 passes.

However, as proven by LA and people I've had the displeasure of working with, it's easy to pass with a little forewarning.

My issue with drug testing is it it just a neo-McCarthyist witch-hunt as proved by the fact it does not test for the 2 drugs that cause (by orders of magnitude) more damage than all others: alcohol and tobacco. I haven't worked for a company that does drug-testing since 1996, won't work for one again.

Between the doping and the race fixing, a great deal of pro racing is artifice. Which is why I keep asking whether you enjoyed the sport more or less before you knew about doping.

My bad. I was picturing Cardiff in California. And also figuring the "zero tolerance, the world needs to be remade to suit me" bit was as American as it gets.

Still I wonder why an action both permitted and legal for the general populace should be restricted for the pros? It would seem to me that if it were over the counter or even a prescription given to a civilian and they can drive, fly an airplane, or heavy equipment they should be able to ride a bicycle.

I'm not naive, I know there's a great deal of doping in most professional sport. That in fact lessens my enjoyment of it. I'm not a teenager and don't need constant action/excitement to enjoy a sport - I enjoy cricket for God's sake

I've always known about doping in cycling, but that has never stopped me enjoying it, or wishing it was clean.

One of my major concerns is the escalation. As one type of doping fails to make the desired difference the only alternative for the professional will be to look for even stronger solutions. If that is zero tolerance of doping then I happily plead guilty

+1 -- and well said...

Some of us 50+ amateur athletes (I would hazard to say most) are very much aware of what we put in our bodies. I can state categorically that I am not using any banned substances, because there are only two (non-prescription) drugs I use periodically, and neither of them are banned. That said, I believe there is a difference between the pro ranks and the amateur ranks, and I don't favor using the meager amateur funds on dug testing. There are higher priorities, like training programs to keep fellow racers from crashing you out. I know that there may be people beating me who are doping, but hey, there are people beating me for a variety reasons. It just doesn't matter as much why, because I'm not trying to make a living at it. The pro's have every reason to NOT want drugs in the picture, because it forces there use to be competitive to make that living, and nobody should be forced to break the law, and harm their body chemically, in order to pursue their career.

And you can't lump all us fans together. Many of us like the nature of the competition much better when there is nobody riding off the front on a drug supported attack that would be impossible for anyone not doped to the gills. I want to see teamwork required. I want to see balance.

Seriously... most of us have raised children. Did you raise your child saying "Breaking the law is okay, so long as you need to do it to make a living." or "Breaking the rules is fine, so long as a lot of people are doing it." How about "Don't worry about your long term health - it's winning the next race that counts!"

Arguing for a change in the rules to allow doping is at least a valid debate. Arguing that everyone should continue to lie and cheat is a non-starter.

No nobody would ever say that to their kids -- because there are much better, more socially acceptable ways to say it... And, when that doesn't work the dad can always resort ot verbally or physically beating up the couch or umpire....

The problem (in schools and in pro sports) is the Vince Lombardi philosophy ... where winning is the only option. Kids are pushed hard to excel in every area. And, when you are under pressure to do something (like winning), you do whatever it takes ....

I wonder how many high school and college athletes are taking PEDs -- not because Lance did it -- but because they know that they will improve their chances...

I think we need to return to the days when sport was sport and fair play and good losers were regarded more highly than performance and winning. Until then, there will simply be one PED scandal after another after another...

I think it is silly to push people to take PEDs and then criticize them for doing it...

While we may not condone it, perhaps the exposure to the non-level playing field that life is, better equips the youth for the real world.

I worked for the founder of a large fast food chain in Canada who stood in front of his employees at a Christmas function and said " If you are going to work for me, you are going to break rules. If I didn't break rules, I would have 5 outlets, not 2500".

In business and in sports, Machiavelli is alive and well to many. Unfortunate as that may be.

To me, I'd say that founder has growing to do.

I agree that our youth needs to understand the realities of life, and of sport. I just want to know that the collective "we" is trying hard to make that field as balanced as is reasonably possible, and that our youth has a path to success that doesn't require them to break the rules. Right now, the decision they are forced to make is to leave the sport (probably ALL sports) and find a different profession. I'd like that to change.

I deal with reality. The case in point was a rail operator. The applicants were culled by x50% after drug and alcohol testing.

Note: Alcohol. Tobacco doesn't impede performance of a task like alcohol and other drugs.

So you would go to work for a construction company or in a mine safe in the knowledge that the guys operating the crane, or some other heavy piece of machinery is under the heavy influence of drugs that alter their judgment and physical ability to operate the controls.

Give me a break.

That is the *first* time I've ever heard of corporate drug testing including alcohol. Good for them.

As for "dealing with reality", are you saying a national drug testing company does not?

Actually, drivers who hold a CDL in the US are subjected to periodic drug testing. Many truck stops along the interstates have walk-in clinics where drivers can be tested at whatever interval is required by law. Many trucks also have on-board computers that automatically log their driving hours. The days when they'd pop a handful of bennies to drive 24-36 hours at a clip are over.