Last Straw???

cyclopath2001

Wibbs wrote:

these cyclists think they can still get away with it. What does that tell you?

That the job is not complete.

Even there attendance is down on the roads compared to the past.

Do you have figures? The sport still has millions of followers. What does that tell you?

Healthy? Not if you want to be a pro it seems. At least a semi competitive one. How many of them have died in dubious health circumstances in the last ten years?

Not as many as the millions that have have benefitted. We should not throw that away.

I don't deny the negatives, but too many people are overlooking the many positive aspects of professional cycling. Calling for it to be stopped is just as absurd as calling for all pubs to be closed because of drunkenness and violence associated with them.

I'm addressing Mike65's ignorant proposal.

What would you do different to the UCI's current policy?

Wibbs

Cyclopath2001 wrote:

That the job is not complete.

Not even started in the right direction.

Do you have figures? The sport still has millions of followers. What does that tell you?

So did a lot of now minority sports in the past. The fact is 5 major European networks refused to air the race this year. Viewing figures are down and will continue in freefall if this isn't nipped in the bud.

I don't deny the negatives, but too many people are overlooking the many positive aspects of professional cycling.

Few enough of those accepted benefits are springing to mind lately

What would you do different to the UCI's current policy?

Lots
Re read my post. Hit the teams and everyone who profits from this in the pocket. Huge fines, life bannings and consistently applied drug checks. As it is the drug tests are largely confined to the tours with a few exceptions. This current idiot who got pulled yesterday avoided drug checks before. What about the current leader, he's avoided a load yet he's still allowed to race and wear that jersey. That does not happen in any other sport I can think of. The UCI are clearly toothless in too many ways. As I said a farce.

cyclopath2001

Wibbs wrote:

As I said a farce.

I think you're exaggerating and sensationalising the negatives and grossly ignoring the huge positive benefits of sport. You're also denigrating what is being done.

A great deal of testing is done. Hundreds of tests just on the TDF. So far, all but two were negative. Even on local events here in Ireland testing is done. The cost is a heavy burden on organisers. Even amateurs are subjected to out-of competition testing. I was at an obscure 2nd-cat event in Northern Ireland this year and UK Sports Council testers (not cycling people) showed up for a random spot-check.

Due process and presumption of innocence are part of society, respect for these ideals should not be seen as an unwillingness to act. Tests can be wrong, mistakes can be made. Some positives can have innocent explanations. The whole process will lose credibility if it's not executed carefully.

Testing is just one way. The supply chain needs to the tackled too.

Trojan

In that vein, I do agree with Lance Armstrong and others when they talk about the over-aggressiveness of testers, and with people like Tyler who talks about the lack of oversight and lab irregularities in drug testing.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Wibbs

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I think you're exaggerating and sensationalising the negatives and grossly ignoring the huge positive benefits of sport. You're also denigrating what is being done.

Really, are you actually that naive? Is that possible? The biggest event in the calendar of the sport and how many high profile riders have been dropped because of drugs? Including the current yellow jersey FFS. The so called sportsmen are doing the denigrating not me. They appear to need little help on bringing the sport into disrepute.

Due process and presumption of innocence are part of society, respect for these ideals should not be seen as an unwillingness to act. Tests can be wrong, mistakes can be made. Some positives can have innocent explanations. The whole process will lose credibility if it's not executed carefully.

Lofty ideals certainly. Result in the face of cynical exploitation of the money to be made out of this? Sand insert head.

Testing is just one way. The supply chain needs to the tackled too.

No, the financial reasons for the abuse, the background to such abuse needs to be tackled. Supply chain is like any illicit drug, it's like the head of the hydra, cut one off and another will take it's place if you don't remove the source for the need to drug up. This attitude is why the UCI is fúcking up and it's the reason why with every year the sport descends into farce.

Trippie

This might put me in a position for a flaming but bear with me.

I have followed pro cycling for a while now and to me it is one of the toughest sports out there if not the toughest and i have yet to meet anyone surprised by landis' positive test last year after seeing the two stages in subsequent days and the difference in performance.As a previous poster mentioned some see two different races one for the performance boosters and one for the clean riders.

So what I am saying would it be possible to permit certain levels of performance techniques and the rider would have to declare which option they are "on" before the start of the stage but depending on the amount of blood they have received or the seriousness of the technique they would receive a percentage time penalty to their finish time and eventually overall the time penalties would add up and the riders could be left with a decision befroe the start of each stage and the ones using would have to push themselves even harder than before in order to negate the negative time penalties

However if anyone is found to have gone over these permitted levels then a much more serious ban would be implemented than the current two year one.


[EDIT] this may not be that coherent as im not exactly sure how to convey what im getting at.

cyclopath2001

Wibbs wrote:

doing the denigrating not me.

Yes, the riders bring the sport into disrepute, but you've answered a different point to the one I made. Cheats are being kicked out, riders are being penalised, tests are being made and you denigrate these actions by saying nothing is being done. You tried to mislead readers here by saying that testing only occurred 'in the tours with a few exceptions' when this is a gross misrepresentation of what actually happens.

The reason why we have the current exposures of cheats is because something is being done.

Lofty ideals certainly. Result in the face of cynical exploitation of the money to be made out of this? Sand insert head.

What are you saying? Abolish fairness? Punish people without proper evidence? With Rasmussen, until now, there was not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing until now. Now he's been kicked out by his team. That seems reasonable. The last thing we need are lots of court cases because of shaky evidence.

No, the financial reasons for the abuse, the background to such abuse needs to be tackled.

Could you clarify what are you saying? Abolish all professional sport?

The current scandals certainly wound the sport but its better that these happen in the public eye and based on proper evidence than swept under the carpet or dealt with in secret. That way the message gets out to the riders and the public can see that the sport is confident enough in its core strengths and huge public support to be able to take the damage inflicted by the embarrassments that we're now having.

Wibbs

Yea I can see where you're going with that. There's a part of me that would throw in the towel at this stage. Throw away the rule book and if the teams want to field drug fueled mutants that burn out and die in full view of the cameras I say go for it. The gladitorial aspect appeals. Drug fueled mutants racing and dieing makes for great TV. The problem is it would be even harder to implement than a blanket ban. Also the naive would be hopping up and down screaming "will someone think of the children" with regard to the drugs themselves.

The only way you can stop this? Make the penalties higher than the benefits. It's that simple. The reverse is true at the moment. If the UCI can't see that then pro cycling as it is today is doomed and rightfully so.

Wibbs

cyclopath2001 wrote:

Yes, the riders bring the sport into disrepute, but you've answered a different point to the one I made. Cheats are being kicked out, riders are being penalised, tests are being made and you denigrate these actions by saying nothing is being done.

Something is being done, but if the top riders in the biggest event, with the biggest scrutiny in the cycling calendar are doping then something is seriously wrong if they even dream they cn get away with it.

You tried to mislead readers here by saying that testing only occurred 'in the tours' when this is not true.

The majority of in season testing of the top riders occurs on the tours. fact.

The reason why we have the current exposures of cheats is because something is being done.

You are really missing the point. I bet your one of those people who sees a major Garda drug bust and thinks it actually makes a big difference.

What are you saying? Abolish fairness?

Calm down. Emotive much? "Abolish fairness" Sheesh. Though "abolish fairness" are interesting words to use in connection with pro cycling at the moment.

With Rasmussen, until now, there was not sufficient evidence of wrongdoing until now. Now he's been kicked out by his team. That seems reasonable.

I really can't believe you're this naive. How many tests did he miss? Are you telling me his team, his team manager, his doctor etc weren't aware of that? He misses those tests, yet he and his team and his whole support structure feels he might get away with racing at the front of the peloton of the biggest cycle race on earth? If the media hadn't put the spotlight on the nosferatu headed freak he'd still be in the yellow jersey. Fact.

Could you clarify what are you saying? Abolish all professional sport?

Can you only see two sides, black and white? No i didn't say "Abolish all professional sport".:rolleyes:

The current scandals certainly wound the sport but its better that these happen in the public eye and based on proper evidence than swept under the carpet or dealt with in secret. That way the message gets out to the riders and the public can see that the sport is confident enough in its core strengths and huge public support to be able to take the damage inflicted by the embarrassments that we're now having.

You are that naive. Look at the surveys, look at the viewing figures, look at the print medias reporting of the sport, even look at a bikey forum like this. The beady eye is on the sport for all the wrong reasons. If you can't see that the pro sport is facing an uncertain future then you better jump in with mcquaid and others playing loudly and out of tune in the band on the Titanic.

Again it's this simple, Make the penalties higher than the benefits.

Civilian_Target

I'm all for the mutant cyclists, tbh

cycleoin

Aren't you all missing the point? I think what has happened this week in the Tour is FANTASTIC. Ras's team kicking him out before a test was even returned! 5 French teams and 2 german teams refusing to start the tour on time yesterday! Astana pullinghteir whole team out of the tour, as did cofidis and rabobank.

What we are witnessing is a turning point for cycling. ZERO tolerance. If this was ten years ago (we all remember the taint Festina put on the tour when it came to Ireland) there would be appeals, denials and a lot of hissy fits.

Now we are seeing an allegation is enough to have a whole team pull out. This is worth major money to the teams and it si in their interest to keep their title sponsors on board. If the sponsors are associated with drugged up athleates they will not continue funding a team.

I am delighted to see so many teams pull out because of single riders. It signals a new dawn for cycling.

dedon

I think it is great aswell. A change is really happening. Delighted to see Ras gone. He was never that good a rider untill this year and considering that he missed most of last autumn due to a serious injury. He is so dirty but he shouldn;t have been racing at all.

The thing is Contador is not clean either and should'nt be allowed ride due to operation puerto.

All we need now is for Lance to admit he doped. But he is too much of a coward and an asshole to ever do that.

Pherekydes

cycleoin wrote:

Now we are seeing an allegation is enough to have a whole team pull out.

Well, all you have to do is make an allegation and your rivals are gone.

Maybe we could extend it to criminal law.

Oh, wait, it's already been done, back in the good old days of Hitler and Stalin.

cycleoin

Slow coach wrote:

Well, all you have to do is make an allegation and your rivals are gone.

Maybe we could extend it to criminal law.

Oh, wait, it's already been done, back in the good old days of Hitler and Stalin.

Obviously frivlous allegations are not to be taken lightly. But where there is cause for the allegation such as in Ras's "Iwas in MExico but really in Italy with Dr Ferrari" case there ought to be immediate and swift action, such as a suspension without pay pending out come of investigation.

Also - with regard to the criminal law, sometimes allegations are enough, such as being a member of an illegal organisation, posessing certain scheduled articles etc where the burden of proff shifts to the accused. Applying this to cycling, if a cyclist is found with drugs, or can not account for his movements when questioned by the UCI there should certainly be heavy sanctions.

Well done UCI and President Pat McQuaid is what I say!

Wibbs

cycleoin wrote:

Well done UCI and President Pat McQuaid is what I say!

In fairness the UCI and McQuaid had sod all to do with it. What really did it was the media attention and the sponsors getting itchy feet over possible very public drug scandals. It was going to hit them in the pocket. The UCI and McQuaid make interesting noises, but the money going south is what will likely change things more than nearly anything else.

cycleoin

I whole heartedly agree - as I said in my original post - teams such as AG2R who took a hit of circa €1million are willing to expel the filth (who are caught) from their teams. Money speaks louder than all the words in the world.

With regard to Pat McQuaid and the UCI I was referring to the charter they put in place for the witholding of riders wages in the event of doping.

cyclopath2001

It's also worth noting that prizemoney is not paid out until some months after an event, after the results of dope tests are known.

Now, it's not clear what the rules of the TDF are in the event of a forced 'voluntary' withdrawal, but a disqualification results in all prizemoney won in an event by a rider being forfeit.

Hermy

"...a disqualification results in all prizemoney won in an event by a rider being forfeit."
Are time and point bonuses for the various jerseys redistributed if a rider is disqualified?

cyclopath2001

I think it's theoretically possible for an event's preceding stage classifications to be recalculated as if the disqualified rider had never ridden, but I've never heard of it happening. It may be discretionary for the race jury to decide the full impact in a given situation. It would be impossible to erase the effect of a rider from an event in every way, due to the way tactics work.

In the current scenario, Rasmussen was not disqualified. He was sacked by his team and could no longer take part. He did not test positive, but has clearly lost the trust of his employers.

In the case of the non-positive riders sent home, they have not been disqualified either, but they had agreed when entering the event that they'd have to go home if any team member tested positive.

Before a test for EPO was successfully developed, riders with high haemocrit levels were withdrawn 'on health grounds', but technically had not been found guilty of any wrong-doing.

It's not always possible to prove wrong-doing, so, the UCI has come up with a few second-line tactics such as these.

Pherekydes

cyclopath2001 wrote:

I think it's theoretically possible for an event's preceding stage classifications to be recalculated as if the disqualified rider had never ridden, but I've never heard of it happening. It may be discretionary for the race jury to decide the full impact in a given situation. It would be impossible to erase the effect of a rider from an event in every way, due to the way tactics work.

I'd be fairly miffed if I were Cancellara or McEwen, because both of these, amongst others, were eliminated for being outside the time limit. Without the dopers the stages would surely have been slower.

mloc123

When did Cancellara go out? That is a pity.

Pherekydes

mloc123 wrote:

When did Cancellara go out? That is a pity.

Sorry, Cancellara is still in. I actually meant Zabriskie. (I knew it was a good TTer :rolleyes: )

mloc123

ah okay, I'd like to see Cancellara do well enough in it.

What do people make of Soler? I would like to think he is clean but I dunno.

cyclopath2001

Fom CyclingNews:

"WADA will officially contact the parties involved in the next few days to offer to hold this summit," said WADA director general David Howman. "Because WADA is an independent international body and has a structure which is an equal partnership between the sports movement and governments of the world, we are uniquely positioned to co-ordinate the fight against doping and bring together the strengths and resources of all of these partners involved.

"We are willing to further assist cycling in finding solutions to the doping issue."

The UCI hit back at a critical WADA, with a press release from the Switzerland-based governing body saying: "WADA is now criticising the UCI for having found banned substances, which is the consequence of any effective anti-doping campaign, and is preparing to stage a show trial instigated by its President Richard Pound, who during the Tour de France, has constantly made condescending comments about cycling.

"The same Richard Pound, under threat of a libel complaint, retracted previous statements by sending a letter to The Guardian newspaper confirming in particular that: 'I acknowledge that with the information that I now have, my opinion is that the UCI is not turning a blind eye to doping. On the contrary, the UCI is committed to fight doping in cycling. I would have made it clear that the UCI has indeed a watchful eye on the matter of doping'."

In the UCI's release the organisation welcomed the announcement of WADA's moves to help solve the sport's doping issues. The UCI also declared its willingness to participate in such discussions "in a constructive manner and under acceptable conditions".

Politics.

sabiki2

Former Tour de France winner Stephen Roche believes up to 50 percent of the peloton may still be using performance-enhancing drugs

Fascinating interview with the BBC....he even suggests it was up to 90% a few years ago.

Find the audio link from here:

http://search.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/search/results.pl?tab=ns&q=tour%20de%20france&recipe=all&scope=all&edition=d

Hermy

He also suggests it was only 5 to 10 percent in the 1980's. Yeah right!

parasite

according to eurosport, Soler has tested positive :eek:

Hermy

Just got this on Cyclingpost.com:

"Colombian Juan Mauricio Soler was temporarily the center of attention as Danish media reported that the Polka Dot Jersey holder tested positive after stage 14 of the Tour de France. Organisers ASO meanwhile, announced that the rider is innocent. Danish news source BT reports that police are currently raiding Barloworld's Hotel, and a press conference is scheduled for 11am on Saturday. Bookmakers in England and Italy reportedly removed Soler's name from their odds, as result of these rumours.

Update 12:30pm CET
On Friday, rumours started to spread about one of the Jersey holders having tested positive after stage 14. At that time, these holders were Rasmussen, Contador, and Boonen. Soler did wear the Polka Dot Jersey, although this actually belonged to Rasmussen.
Late at night, Danish media began to report that police were raiding Barloworld's hotel, which linked the earlier rumours to Juan Mauricio Soler.
To this point however, no statements have been made by officials.
Soler is scheduled to appear in the individual time trial on Saturday. The Colombian should be starting at 3:56pm CET.

Update 1:07pm CET
Tour de France director Christian Prudhomme has said that Juan Mauricio Soler did not test positive after the 14th stage in the Tour de France, and indeed, the rider is scheduled to start in the time trial later today.
Whether there was indeed a positive doping test - not belonging to Soler - after stage 14, is still unknown."

© Jonathan Roorda

mloc123

parasite wrote:

according to eurosport, Soler has tested positive :eek:

I am truely disappointed about that.

cyclopath2001

It would be better if they waited until they knew the facts.