Liege - Bastogne - Liege *** SPOILER ***
Comments
-
What I don't get is.......Who was the victim?
As far as I can see this happened between 2 consenting adults someway ahead of the race. Against the rules but part of the culture.
I could understand Katusha sacking Kolobnev for loss of win and points. But that didn't happen.
It all seems a bit meh, after 5 years.
I'd expect a few punters lost some money. But that's their own fault for betting on bike racing. Deals, favours being called in, alliances, it's all part of the sport. The whole 'private corruption' thing is a pile of toss.It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.0 -
So rigged betting is just fine by you then? Just because something has always gone on, it doesn't mean it should continue.I'd expect a few punters lost some money. But that's their own fault for betting on bike racing. Deals, favours being called in, alliances, it's all part of the sport. The whole 'private corruption' thing is a pile of toss.
Tactical sporting arrangements for mutual benefit are fine. But just buying a race - that just shouldn't be acceptable these days. It's match fixing - pure and simple.Twitter: @RichN950 -
So rigged betting is just fine by you then? Just because something has always gone on, it doesn't mean it should continue.I'd expect a few punters lost some money. But that's their own fault for betting on bike racing. Deals, favours being called in, alliances, it's all part of the sport. The whole 'private corruption' thing is a pile of toss.
Tactical sporting arrangements for mutual benefit are fine. But just buying a race - that just shouldn't be acceptable these days. It's match fixing - pure and simple.
No, not match fixing. It wasn't pre-determined before the event. This arrangement was made by 2 breakaways, one of them was going to win. There were a load of other riders that chose to mark Contador, allowing Vino to escape.
Were they all in on it? :roll:0 -
So rigged betting is just fine by you then? Just because something has always gone on, it doesn't mean it should continue.I'd expect a few punters lost some money. But that's their own fault for betting on bike racing. Deals, favours being called in, alliances, it's all part of the sport. The whole 'private corruption' thing is a pile of toss.
Tactical sporting arrangements for mutual benefit are fine. But just buying a race - that just shouldn't be acceptable these days. It's match fixing - pure and simple.
No, not match fixing. It wasn't pre-determined before the event. This arrangement was made by 2 breakaways, one of them was going to win. There were a load of other riders that chose to mark Contador, allowing Vino to escape.
Were they all in on it? :roll:
No it's match fixing. It doesn't matter when the result was decided (and it was predetermined before the finish). How it was decided is what matters. And if one party pays the other party to lose that's match fixing. Go and ask any of your friends who follow sport but not cycling so much and ask them if they think it's acceptable.
These aren't peasants trying scrape a living any more. They are Monaco dwelling millionaires. And they are taking you for a ride. And you're letting them because you think accepting it makes you a more 'knowing' fan.Twitter: @RichN950 -
It's the blatant selling of this race that is the real crime. If it had been a stage race whereby there would have been a mutual race benefit i.e letting a rider drag you to the line and not jumping him because he's assisted you on your GC position that seems to me to be acceptable.
I'm struggling to reconcile this scenario though. If Kolobnev is that desperate to secure an income over winning a monument he should get a regular job.0 -
Pfft. You lot.
Cycling has stuff bought and sold all the time.
its only because the exchange medium is money and you don't like the buyer that you lot are up in arms.0 -
Wasn't it more of a donation anyway - Kolobnev didn't look like he could have won even if he wanted to.0
-
The counter argument to it being match fixing is Kolobnev knew he couldn't outsprint Vino and knew Vino wouldn't drag him to the line so in effect his chance of winning was tiny. It was a collective action problem and money was used to get the best sporting outcome for both of them.
I don't actually agree it was ok and I do think a message should be sent out that it is not acceptable but at the same time it's not really quite the same as paying to fix a football match. Add in the fact it's not unique in cycling and I'm not convinced this was crime of the century. Sanction them maybe, it's more about changing the sport so people are clear it being unacceptable but Rick's points are at least reasonable mitigating factors.[Castle Donington Ladies FC - going up in '22]0 -
Pfft. You lot.
Cycling has stuff bought and sold all the time.
its only because the exchange medium is money and you don't like the buyer that you lot are up in arms.
I want to see anyone who bought Cancellara a bottle of wine before the beak"In many ways, my story was that of a raging, Christ-like figure who hauled himself off the cross, looked up at the Romans with blood in his eyes and said 'My turn, sock cookers'"
@gietvangent0 -
If your defence of something is that it has always gone on, then you are defending the indefensible.Pfft. You lot.
Cycling has stuff bought and sold all the time.
its only because the exchange medium is money and you don't like the buyer that you lot are up in arms.Twitter: @RichN950 -
I am a bit confused about this thread = L-B-L, when I keep thinking it's about the last Olympic R/R in London. ???No it's match fixing. It doesn't matter when the result was decided (and it was predetermined before the finish). How it was decided is what matters. And if one party pays the other party to lose that's match fixing. Go and ask any of your friends who follow sport but not cycling so much and ask them if they think it's acceptable.
These aren't peasants trying scrape a living any more. They are Monaco dwelling millionaires. And they are taking you for a ride. And you're letting them because you think accepting it makes you a more 'knowing' fan.Organiser, National Championship 50 mile Time Trial 19720 -
If your defence of something is that it has always gone on, then you are defending the indefensible.Pfft. You lot.
Cycling has stuff bought and sold all the time.
its only because the exchange medium is money and you don't like the buyer that you lot are up in arms.
No it's more we celebrate lots of purchases and selling of favours (for other favours) all the time.
If we boil down all success in cycling to money (and they're professional so it's not an enormous leap) Indurain or Contador letting someone else win the stage for they have bigger GC fish to fry is no different in essence.
Only we praise Indurain for "not making enemies" despite the fact he sold multiple stage victories in return for GC help from non-team mates.0 -
It's just bartering. All the time. Happens in all races. All money does is make the process of buying & selling easier through providing a fungible currency.0
-
It's just bartering. All the time. Happens in all races. All money does is make the process of buying & selling easier through providing a fungible currency.
not really; if it were a favour system then the riders would have to barter a win against another win so there would be credit and debit on both sides (i.e. you take the stage if you help me win the MJ, or you go for the win at fleche and I'll go for LBL)
when money starts changing hands then it breaks the closed system and the richest can buy again and again without selling"I get paid to make other people suffer on my wheel, how good is that"
--Jens Voight0 -
It's just bartering. All the time. Happens in all races. All money does is make the process of buying & selling easier through providing a fungible currency.
not really; if it were a favour system then the riders would have to barter a win against another win so there would be credit and debit on both sides (i.e. you take the stage if you help me win the MJ, or you go for the win at fleche and I'll go for LBL)
when money starts changing hands then it breaks the closed system and the richest can buy again and again without selling
The money in these deals is usually (parts of) the prize money, so it's not about being rich per se.0 -
There's a difference between 'bartering' in a stage race where you want someone to have an incentive to work for you achieving a long term, bigger reward (GC win) in return for sacrificing the short term stage win and paying someone to let you win a one off race. The first is a tactical decision as the main goal of the race is to win the overall GC.0
