Is pro cycling cured or more fxck'd than ever?
Comments
-
What's the point in this? Make the poll more balanced or don't bother at all.
Some of the leaders are doping, but I don't think many domestiques are doping. Navarro springs to mind as an exception for example.The British Empire never died, it just moved to the Velodrome0 -
Despite your obvious trolling...
Look at some of the recently posted youtubes of climbs during the noughties.
None of us have the definitive answer but draw your own conclusions.
Muppet!0 -
morstar wrote:Look at some of the recently posted youtubes of climbs during the noughties.
None of us have the definitive answer but draw your own conclusions.
Muppet!
Sorry for being a bit soft, but are you agreeing or dsagreeing?
I have not enjoyed a TdF as much for many a year. Only 2ish mins between the top 4 suggests to me at least that doping has been contained if not eradicated?0 -
Rutlandblue
Apologies for being obtuse. It's what I felt the thread deserved.
I would concur with your opinion.
It will never go away completely but the difference between rides today and those of 5-10 years ago is quite stark.0 -
fastercyclist
Personally I think it is far more important for the domestiques to dope as they need to perform day in day out. Taking your example of Navarro, he is putting his body through perfury day in day out for Alberto but seems amazingly able the day after and the day after that. Absolutely stunning recovery ability.
morstar
Not interested in the slightest in entering into an argument with you. I'm a cyclist, I have a long term interest in cycling and Tour de France. I only post on this forum during Tour de France as I am not so into the BB end of cyclign to want to hang here for the rest of the year.
This is just a very simple poll.
Not only have we had 0 positives but not even the inkling bar the most recent Petacchi newspiece. Regardless as to whether it is only a selection of dopers, i.e. just the elite or the whole peleton is not the question I am currently interested in. It is rather whether we are now seeing natural sporting ability or that pro cycling has just gone back to the statusquo pre-Festina when no-one cared as long as the right cyclists won and the French wern't embarassed.0 -
morstar wrote:Rutlandblue
Apologies for being obtuse. It's what I felt the thread deserved.
I would concur with your opinion.
It will never go away completely but the difference between rides today and those of 5-10 years ago is quite stark.
Interesting really it was far less than 5-10 years where Rasmussen and Contador were trading eye-bulging thrust attacks or Ricco was dancing on the pedals into the Cera fuelled distance.
Personally I have grave doubts about the entire Rabobank team post Rasmussen. It was quite obvious at the time that the DS knew in detail about Rasmussen and that other riders were implemented in Vienna gate. On top of this Menchov rode side by side with Italy's finest tainted cyclist di Luca in Giro 09 before finally beating him, a great feat against someone with such talent and so doped.
Oh and as someone mentioned in the 'Schleck tough luck thread' that is was amusign how upset we all got about Contador's lack of etiquette against a cyclist whose brother made a proven $7000 payment to Fuentes a man whose only use to world sports is for illicit doping related methods and wares.0 -
morstar
I do agree that this shouldn't be a one way street of speculation and I'd love to be convinced that it has subsided greatly and it is not present anymore amongst the elite group. The only serious counter=argument I have seen is climbing speeds/wattage outputs but if the system has just be reigned in i.e. here are the boundaries of detection, make sure you keep within them otherwise testing will definitely get you as it has evolved then this hasn't resolved the issue just disguised it.
In this tour we have seen some incredibly hard climbs, the overall route has been so difficult that cyclists such as Wiggins admit that the course is just too difficult for him and still the 'top' guys look incredibly fresh.
We shall observe on Thursday exactly how fresh Schleck and Alberto seem after 20 odd gruelling days of solid cycling.0 -
Give it a few days, postive tests normally get announced after the tour has finished...2010 Lynskey R230
2013 Yeti SB660 -
I don't believe it's even 75% clean, HOWEVER, I believe that cycling does more than any other sport in the world to actually catch dopers. It's not even close. Imagine if football, or American football tested as often and as much as cycling does! I'll bet 99% of them would test positive.0
-
Two facts seem to me to be encouraging - firstly, that both Bertie and Andy have had times when they looked a bit shaky. Secondly, that so many French riders have won stages.0
-
I reckon that despite the obvious limitations of the 50% haemocrit level and the biological passport, they have put a cap on doping. It's still just as widespread, but not quite as effective as it was in the rampant EPO era of the 90s/00s.Bike lover and part-time cyclist.0
-
AidanR
Surely though that isn't any better. I see the biggest problem where doping is endemic is that the amateur cyclists when breaking through to pro are still faced with the single option of embarking on a 10-15 year consistent doping schedule or give up. Whether it is extreme doping or diet-doping doesn't make so much difference.
I also wouldn't class CERA over last few years or Perfluorocarbon (potentially associated with Petacchi) as in anyway diet!
Perhaps I am too sceptical and that Garmin is actually a fully clean team and riders like Hsjedel are clean. What I would say is that if you can escape being detected by the vampires this can also go for avoiding detection from your team principals.
I would suspect that blood doping is far more complicated without the complicity of the team.0 -
donrhummy wrote:I don't believe it's even 75% clean, HOWEVER, I believe that cycling does more than any other sport in the world to actually catch dopers. It's not even close. Imagine if football, or American football tested as often and as much as cycling does! I'll bet 99% of them would test positive.
An excellent point. Only it won't actually happen to football as there is too much money invested in it and too many superstars to be busted. Point in case Rio Ferdinand - knew he was going to be tested but went to ground with the flimsiest of excuses - result No Follow Up test (or if there was it was done at Man U's request of a later date - i.e. enough time for him to get himself sorted out).
There are rumours of others in football doping or taking such products but it won't come out. However cycling is always attacked for it - simply because it's not a majority sport.0 -
Anyone got a good link to the times/rates over the years?0
-
donrhummy - NFL players are test constantly. Atleast once a week during the season if i'm not mistaken. If they fail to turn up for a test they are assumed positive and banned. The NFL now has the most strict drug testing in all of the major American sports. The rest don't even come close.
Cycling has a long way to go but you have to start somewhere. I think you can assume pretty much every good Italian - Cunego omitted - in the last 10 years has been doping, its systematic, was with Germans and Spanish too from what i read. I hope the right people are commited to change, draw a line and move on. Letting people like Vino continue to ride is not helping the process.
The NFL was riddled with it and guys were/are dropping dead in thier 40's/50's. this may yet come to pass in cycling. But they did something. The union - as in baseball - resisted but they got it done and the league is better for it. Baseball still turns a blind eye to all the drugs its players use - mainly HGH - and instead test for the basics and funnily enough very few players get caught. Got to get tough and ban guys right away.0 -
plectrum wrote:morstar
Not interested in the slightest in entering into an argument with you. I'm a cyclist, I have a long term interest in cycling and Tour de France. I only post on this forum during Tour de France
So basically you aren't even proper a Pro Cycling fan? Just a fair weather fan.0 -
Raphapimp wrote:donrhummy - NFL players are test constantly. Atleast once a week during the season if i'm not mistaken. If they fail to turn up for a test they are assumed positive and banned. The NFL now has the most strict drug testing in all of the major American sports. The rest don't even come close.
During the season isn't when they're taking the drugs - it's the off-season when they do all the training to maintain their size.Twitter: @RichN950 -
For me there is a stark difference this year that may be a sign that there is less doping. The first week was designed to really shake up the peloton and I think its had a huge effect on a number of riders in effort expended. Similarly the mountain stages have been really tough and suit the lighter mountain goats. In the past I think there would have been less 'surprises' in those suffering. The time gaps at the top are not massive although it does look like a two horse race, but I think this tour has been tailor made for a Contador, Schleck battle and I think that the fact that no one is really closely challenging them is an indication of how much the course suits the pair of them.
I like the idea of a brutal first week, sadistic but great telly.0 -
plectrum wrote:AidanR
Surely though that isn't any better. I see the biggest problem where doping is endemic is that the amateur cyclists when breaking through to pro are still faced with the single option of embarking on a 10-15 year consistent doping schedule or give up. Whether it is extreme doping or diet-doping doesn't make so much difference.
I also wouldn't class CERA over last few years or Perfluorocarbon (potentially associated with Petacchi) as in anyway diet!
Perhaps I am too sceptical and that Garmin is actually a fully clean team and riders like Hsjedel are clean. What I would say is that if you can escape being detected by the vampires this can also go for avoiding detection from your team principals.
I would suspect that blood doping is far more complicated without the complicity of the team.
Oh yeah, it's still bad. Ultimately though, the smaller the advantage from doping the less the temptation. If you can restrict it to the point that the very top clean riders are vaguely competitive then you start to eliminate the "dope or give up" choice. I don't think we're there though. And obviously eliminating doping altogether would be much better.Bike lover and part-time cyclist.0 -
It's unfair to stop at pro cycling. Pretty much all top levels of any sport will have it's issues. And if you asked me to race constantly for 3 weeks, I'd be on the gear too."A cyclist has nothing to lose but his chain"
PTP Runner Up 20150 -
How can the sport be more doped than ever? For decades the practice went unchecked and it was a closed shop. That is no longer the case, no matter how unapologetic any individual may be, behaviour has HAD to be modified.
As for where we actually are today, none of us really know despite estimated figures. My take is as follows. Either, the sport is significantly cleaner and the majority have turned their back on doping or the practice has been greatly moderated.
I am actually very optimistic about the whole situation. There will still be dopers as there is always an element of society that will cheat without a second thought. The rest of the peloton will be anywhere on the sliding scale of “could be persuaded to dope” to “absolutely won’t”. It is with these riders where the battle for hearts and minds takes place. If you assume that the default position is of preferring not to dope then I think there is a good chance a large number of riders are completely clean with another large chunk operating around the perimeters of when does a legitimate supplement become a PED. Maybe this is as clean as any sport can ever be in this day and age.
A number of the key protagonists still riding have doped and I know this. However, CERA undermined one of the fundamental principles of doping. This is that the cheats are ALWAYS one step ahead of the testers. If you don’t think that had an impact then you believe cyclists are operating on a totally isolated social scale.
RE: the OP’s comments about Rasmussen vs Conti, yes I agree they were on the good stuff. I accept that AC most likely has doped and may well still be but I am certain he ain’t on the same prep as he was only 3 years ago.
By the late noughties, supercharged performances stood out like sore thumbs. I called Vino’s TT about half way round the course and was proven right. 2008 was ridiculed for being a bland tour but to me that was a clear result of the supercharged riders not being there. Everybody attacked each other on the climbs but nobody could maintain it as human physiology kicked in.
I’m going to stop now as I’m starting waffle. It is cleaner! Of that I am certain.0 -
There is definitely less doping i cycling today. Just compare the climbing stats; on any major climb the result is several minutes slower than during the eighties/nineties.
This obviously does not mean that cycling is now dopefree."Wo ist mein Fahrrad?"
-Ralf Hutter of Kraftwerk waking up from a coma after a crashing with his bicycle-0 -
Says it all really when you look at the volume of `dope` books written by past and present riders, a shocking mess thats certainly harmed cycling`s image big style and for me certainly made me look elsewhere for other sports training after years of two wheeled fun....sad but true?0
-
Dgh wrote:Two facts seem to me to be encouraging - firstly, that both Bertie and Andy have had times when they looked a bit shaky. Secondly, that so many French riders have won stages.
Good concise quote though I definitely harbour doubts on the anti-doping system in Spain with all due respect but the 2nd part definitely is a good measurement on whether doping controls is working some since the French have been turned inside out to try to be honest.
----
Another post on page 2 is good talking about the mountain climbs now being slower than in the '90s but I don't think the '80s can be added into that equation unless there are some figures somewhere that prove that.There is definitely less doping i cycling today. Just compare the climbing stats; on any major climb the result is several minutes slower than during the eighties/nineties.
This obviously does not mean that cycling is now dopefree.0 -
As observed by others the poll is deliberately skewed. I would definately say that option 1 isn't the case but I would also say that it is looking cleaner than it has at any point oin the 22 years I've been following pro cycling. Riders are looking genuinely knackered now and no-one is going on 10km attacks up the final climb of the day. As others have also said cycling has always been one of the most tested sports.0
