ASK no Questions

Bronzie

eh wrote:

average speed is a rubbish indicator of true performance because courses are different, even the same race has course changes between years, weather conditions change, competitors change, team organisations change, etc.

The best indicator of the step in performance between UK-based Elite riders and full-time continental pros is when they race against each other (ie Tour of Britain).

One of my mates is currently top-10 in the Premier Calendar overall rankings. When he last rode the ToB (2007 I think) he finished 3rd from last on the GC. Now it could be that he just had bad form at the time, but by his own admission, every day in the company of full-time pros was a shoeing for him. He still holds down a day job though, so he's always going to find competing against full-timers a bit of a problem.

eh

Bronzie: Yeah the step up is big if you aren't full time.

Slight aside: I still think the British riders who went to the Worlds through the 90's and got slagged off by the likes of the comic for being rubbish are owed an apology. The British based riders knew that EPO etc. were rife in the Pro ranks and so did anyone else connected at a high level, so either the jurnos were rubbish at their jobs or were as much complicit in not mentioning EPO as anyone else. Far easier to blame the domestic riders for being cr*p than mention that Jalabert, Zulle, etc were on the sauce.

Also mind back then the BC were a complete shower, now anyone going to the Worlds would get much better backup.

afx237vi

Monty Dog wrote:

If spending a few grand on kit every year is a sign or an inclination to use PEDs, then I'm as guilty as the next man, but perhaps is more symptomatic of the cynicism and the jealousy of others..

That's not what I meant. I was simply saying that the cost/benefit argument - ie, people won't spend thousands to earn peanuts in prize money - doesn't work when you consider that people already spend thousands on kit in order to shave a second or two off their personal best in a 10 mile TT.

Doping is just another alternative to buying a new pair of deep section wheels. Some people may choose it, others may not.

moray_gub

afx237vi wrote:

Monty Dog wrote:

If spending a few grand on kit every year is a sign or an inclination to use PEDs, then I'm as guilty as the next man, but perhaps is more symptomatic of the cynicism and the jealousy of others..

That's not what I meant. I was simply saying that the cost/benefit argument - ie, people won't spend thousands to earn peanuts in prize money - doesn't work when you consider that people already spend thousands on kit in order to shave a second or two off their personal best in a 10 mile TT.

Doping is just another alternative to buying a new pair of deep section wheels. Some people may choose it, others may not.

Not really a good comparison if you want a set of deep section wheels and had the money to buy them youd probably do so as there isnt any really moral issues to deal with buying a set of hoops but if you had the money to dope it doesnt follow you would do that.

Kléber

If you want some wheels, they're hanging up in a bike shop. The cost, well you just pony the cash and then have to maintain them. Doping means finding illicit sources, risking your health and either finding a dodgy doctor or injecting the stuff by yourself. Much more complicated (and stupid too).

As for the likes of junior Ricco and Johnson, they were doping but on an elite path, their cheating would pay off with a pro contract or a rainbow jersey. Some chump on EPO for a Premier Calendar is going to struggle to make a profit from the racing all year unless they're one of the best and then they get tested enough to make detection a real risk. As for lowly riders cheating in the US, I can believe it but it must be minimal and the culture there is different, from the way they inject their beef with hormones to the way many gyms and fitness centres openly sell steroids on the front desk.

dennisn

Moray Gub wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Monty Dog wrote:

If spending a few grand on kit every year is a sign or an inclination to use PEDs, then I'm as guilty as the next man, but perhaps is more symptomatic of the cynicism and the jealousy of others..

That's not what I meant. I was simply saying that the cost/benefit argument - ie, people won't spend thousands to earn peanuts in prize money - doesn't work when you consider that people already spend thousands on kit in order to shave a second or two off their personal best in a 10 mile TT.

Doping is just another alternative to buying a new pair of deep section wheels. Some people may choose it, others may not.

Not really a good comparison if you want a set of deep section wheels and had the money to buy them youd probably do so as there isnt any really moral issues to deal with buying a set of hoops but if you had the money to dope it doesnt follow you would do that.

I think doping is thought of as something that works, helps you train harder, recover better, and is an easier way to gain performance advantages. All basically true statements(more or less). Add to this the devil may care attitude of young athletes who see only into tomorrow and maybe the next day, and are invulnerable to boot. Easy to see why doping is "popular"(for lack of a better word). These drugs and techniques for
administering them do work to an athletes advantage(to varying degrees). So, fame and fortune await or at the very least a big set of biceps. Getting caught, now that's another
matter altogether. Anyway the whole thing reminds me of the old hippie saying "why do you think they call it dope?".

LangerDan

Kléber wrote:

If you want some wheels, they're hanging up in a bike shop. The cost, well you just pony the cash and then have to maintain them. Doping means finding illicit sources, risking your health and either finding a dodgy doctor or injecting the stuff by yourself. Much more complicated (and stupid too).

Certainly, if your first port of call in doping is to be some expensive, injectable compound like EPO or blood transfusions, then yes, it is complicated. However, you can indulge a PED habit with far lower costs and less complexity. In the five minutes before writing this, I was able to identify a suitable "sports grade" testosterone gel and then find a (fairly) legitimate website to purchase it at ~ $15 a tube. All that remained was to hand over my credit card.
You do run a far higher risk of detection if tested, but the chances of being tested are far lower on the amateur scene.

Over the years, i've seen amateur riders do some astonishingly silly things to further their dreams of success on a bike - quit school months before their final exams, quit jobs and sign on the dole to train more and also dope to win chipper races or place top 20 or 30 in a national event. Stupid? yes, but that didn't stop it from happening.

richard wants a baum

dennisn wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

afx237vi wrote:

Monty Dog wrote:

If spending a few grand on kit every year is a sign or an inclination to use PEDs, then I'm as guilty as the next man, but perhaps is more symptomatic of the cynicism and the jealousy of others..

That's not what I meant. I was simply saying that the cost/benefit argument - ie, people won't spend thousands to earn peanuts in prize money - doesn't work when you consider that people already spend thousands on kit in order to shave a second or two off their personal best in a 10 mile TT.

Doping is just another alternative to buying a new pair of deep section wheels. Some people may choose it, others may not.

Not really a good comparison if you want a set of deep section wheels and had the money to buy them youd probably do so as there isnt any really moral issues to deal with buying a set of hoops but if you had the money to dope it doesnt follow you would do that.

I think doping is thought of as something that works, helps you train harder, recover better, and is an easier way to gain performance advantages. All basically true statements(more or less). Add to this the devil may care attitude of young athletes who see only into tomorrow and maybe the next day, and are invulnerable to boot. Easy to see why doping is "popular"(for lack of a better word). These drugs and techniques for
administering them do work to an athletes advantage(to varying degrees). So, fame and fortune await or at the very least a big set of biceps. Getting caught, now that's another
matter altogether. Anyway the whole thing reminds me of the old hippie saying "why do you think they call it dope?".

Okay i must be suffering really bad sleep deprivation (new baby has decided he likes crying at 2 and 4 in the morning :roll: ) Dennis is making sense :shock: