Drugs in other sports and the media.

1…1819212324…218

Comments

  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Few things.

    A) is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)

    B) as a cycling fan, presumably no-one is surprised by all of this?

    B part 2) in which case, why make a thread about it?
    _
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,730
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Few things.

    A) is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)

    B) as a cycling fan, presumably no-one is surprised by all of this?

    B part 2) in which case, why make a thread about it?

    For the same reason that we have threads about cycling doping news?
    I'm pretty sure that no one is surprised by that, either.

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Few things.

    A) is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)

    B) as a cycling fan, presumably no-one is surprised by all of this?

    B part 2) in which case, why make a thread about it?

    For the same reason that we have threads about cycling doping news?
    I'm pretty sure that no one is surprised by that, either.

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,692
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
    W. Edwards Deming wrote:
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

    Please provide your statistical analysis. I'm assuming that some form of survey has been taken, and that it was based on the subset of the worlds people that "give a crap" about sports at all. I'd be loathe to have to assume that you were extrapolating from your own viewpoint to "the vast majority of the worlds people".

    In the meantime, for anyone that does "give a crap" about doping in sport, even in a pretty limited way, these latest revelations are extremely significant. That includes those who think they just confirm what they already believed, as well as those that are shocked that it could be so bad.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
    W. Edwards Deming wrote:
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

    Please provide your statistical analysis. I'm assuming that some form of survey has been taken, and that it was based on the subset of the worlds people that "give a crap" about sports at all. I'd be loathe to have to assume that you were extrapolating from your own viewpoint to "the vast majority of the worlds people".

    In the meantime, for anyone that does "give a crap" about doping in sport, even in a pretty limited way, these latest revelations are extremely significant. That includes those who think they just confirm what they already believed, as well as those that are shocked that it could be so bad.

    So, what's your plan? What are YOU going to do with or about these "extremely significant" "revelations"? I'm guessing you'll do pretty much nothing except bitch and moan? Be my guest.
    As for "..the vast majority blah, blah, blah....". I am around a goodly number of people, including cyclists, and I don't hear anyone bitching and moaning about drugs in sport. Try and get it through your head that just because you care, doesn't mean we all have to. Most people have much more important things to do with their lives than obsess about whether someone is sticking a needle in their arm. Get on with life and worry about number one instead of some doper.
  • blazing_saddles
    blazing_saddles Posts: 22,730
    dennisn wrote:
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
    W. Edwards Deming wrote:
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

    Please provide your statistical analysis. I'm assuming that some form of survey has been taken, and that it was based on the subset of the worlds people that "give a crap" about sports at all. I'd be loathe to have to assume that you were extrapolating from your own viewpoint to "the vast majority of the worlds people".

    In the meantime, for anyone that does "give a crap" about doping in sport, even in a pretty limited way, these latest revelations are extremely significant. That includes those who think they just confirm what they already believed, as well as those that are shocked that it could be so bad.

    So, what's your plan? What are YOU going to do with or about these "extremely significant" "revelations"? I'm guessing you'll do pretty much nothing except ***** and moan? Be my guest.
    As for "..the vast majority blah, blah, blah....". I am around a goodly number of people, including cyclists, and I don't hear anyone bitching and moaning about drugs in sport. Try and get it through your head that just because you care, doesn't mean we all have to. Most people have much more important things to do with their lives than obsess about whether someone is sticking a needle in their arm. Get on with life and worry about number one instead of some doper.

    You care enough to, over the years, have made hundreds of impassioned posts about not caring.
    Odd that.
    "Science is a tool for cheaters". An anonymous French PE teacher.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,660
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Few things.

    A) is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)

    B) as a cycling fan, presumably no-one is surprised by all of this?

    B part 2) in which case, why make a thread about it?

    For the same reason that we have threads about cycling doping news?
    I'm pretty sure that no one is surprised by that, either.

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    Sure, but this is a cycling forum.
    _
  • Mad_Malx
    Mad_Malx Posts: 5,183
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Few things.

    A) is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)

    B) as a cycling fan, presumably no-one is surprised by all of this?

    B part 2) in which case, why make a thread about it?

    Because what we are really short of are threads about doping?
  • dolan_driver
    dolan_driver Posts: 831
    is the purpose of this thread to make cycling fans feel better in relation to other sports ("Ner ner, your sport has doping problems too)


    No, the purpose of this thread was to attempt to draw a comparison between the media coverage of doping in cycling versus doping in other sports. As a cycling fan, it appears to me that the media are only interested in reporting on doping in cycling but have no interest in highlighting doping in other sports. We all know other sports have plenty of ethical problems, be they drugs or otherwise (see yesterday's dive-fest in the Premier League for example) but it just seemed to me the media were only interested in highlighting the problems in cycling. I tried to illustrate this with the few links that I attached in the opening post and then see what others thought.

    Maybe part of the reason for setting up this thread was to make us feel a little bit better about our own beloved sport. As threads on drugs go here on Bikeradar, it appears this one is pretty OK as it isn't dominated by the various arguments about SKY or Contador. The fact that it has now run to 31 pages shows, I think, that this thread has been of some value to the Bikeradar community.

    I think the recent work by Paul Kimmage in relation to rugby possibly illustrates the two-tiered approach that has been adopted by the regular media up to now but perhaps things are slowly changing. Then again, perhaps it will be the case that Kimmage will simply tackle each sport in turn. That will keep him busy for the next twenty years!

    DD.
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
    W. Edwards Deming wrote:
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

    Please provide your statistical analysis. I'm assuming that some form of survey has been taken, and that it was based on the subset of the worlds people that "give a crap" about sports at all. I'd be loathe to have to assume that you were extrapolating from your own viewpoint to "the vast majority of the worlds people".

    In the meantime, for anyone that does "give a crap" about doping in sport, even in a pretty limited way, these latest revelations are extremely significant. That includes those who think they just confirm what they already believed, as well as those that are shocked that it could be so bad.

    So, what's your plan? What are YOU going to do with or about these "extremely significant" "revelations"? I'm guessing you'll do pretty much nothing except ***** and moan? Be my guest.
    As for "..the vast majority blah, blah, blah....". I am around a goodly number of people, including cyclists, and I don't hear anyone bitching and moaning about drugs in sport. Try and get it through your head that just because you care, doesn't mean we all have to. Most people have much more important things to do with their lives than obsess about whether someone is sticking a needle in their arm. Get on with life and worry about number one instead of some doper.

    You care enough to, over the years, have made hundreds of impassioned posts about not caring.
    Odd that.

    No, not so odd when you think about it I really don't care about drugs in sports. It has zero affect on my life, the way live it, or the things I do. I don't make any money from it. The idea that someone is doing performance enhancing drugs is of little interest to me. it's their issue, not mine. Are they ruining whatever sport they are involved with? Doubt it. Crowds just seem to get bigger and bigger. You guys keep saying that everyone should be concerned simply because you are. No, not everyone cares. Take cycling. Monster crowds at the TDF and other pro races despite the fact that there have been many, many "scandals"(if you will)in the past 20 years. To me this shows that people don't care about doping and, in fact, doping may actually help draw crowds. Just like bodybuilding - people want to see the freaks.
    As for me, I post here because I like a good argument / debate, and I really do believe that it's not healthy to become so obsessed with your so called cycling heroes. And I'll say so if I wish. Forget about your doped up heroes and be one yourself. Much more rewarding.
  • mm1
    mm1 Posts: 1,063
    Happy to see joggers and the like take some heat (ner, ner, na, ner, ner).

    Favourite finger pointing story is of the late, great, Pascal Jules who overheard a pair of joggers say something like "there goes one of them druggy cyclists" as he rode past, he turned round and gave them both a pasting. The Nacer Bouhani of his day (and then some). I kind of want the sport that I love to be an honest competition, but I'm not going to lose any sleep over it. There's greater injustices and far worse crimes going on every day to be really bothered.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,692
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    Blazing Saddles wrote:

    These latest revelations are, after all, pretty significant by any measure.

    I agree with your first statement. However, on the second point I'm going to propose that the vast majority of the worlds people really don't give a crap about doping in sports. You may see it as "significant" revelations but you're not in any majority by any means. Depending on your meaning of "significant" of course.
    W. Edwards Deming wrote:
    In God we trust, all others bring data.

    Please provide your statistical analysis. I'm assuming that some form of survey has been taken, and that it was based on the subset of the worlds people that "give a crap" about sports at all. I'd be loathe to have to assume that you were extrapolating from your own viewpoint to "the vast majority of the worlds people".

    In the meantime, for anyone that does "give a crap" about doping in sport, even in a pretty limited way, these latest revelations are extremely significant. That includes those who think they just confirm what they already believed, as well as those that are shocked that it could be so bad.

    So, what's your plan? What are YOU going to do with or about these "extremely significant" "revelations"? I'm guessing you'll do pretty much nothing except ***** and moan? Be my guest.
    As for "..the vast majority blah, blah, blah....". I am around a goodly number of people, including cyclists, and I don't hear anyone bitching and moaning about drugs in sport. Try and get it through your head that just because you care, doesn't mean we all have to. Most people have much more important things to do with their lives than obsess about whether someone is sticking a needle in their arm. Get on with life and worry about number one instead of some doper.

    You care enough to, over the years, have made hundreds of impassioned posts about not caring.
    Odd that.

    No, not so odd when you think about it I really don't care about drugs in sports. It has zero affect on my life, the way live it, or the things I do. I don't make any money from it. The idea that someone is doing performance enhancing drugs is of little interest to me. it's their issue, not mine. Are they ruining whatever sport they are involved with? Doubt it. Crowds just seem to get bigger and bigger. You guys keep saying that everyone should be concerned simply because you are. No, not everyone cares. Take cycling. Monster crowds at the TDF and other pro races despite the fact that there have been many, many "scandals"(if you will)in the past 20 years. To me this shows that people don't care about doping and, in fact, doping may actually help draw crowds. Just like bodybuilding - people want to see the freaks.
    As for me, I post here because I like a good argument / debate, and I really do believe that it's not healthy to become so obsessed with your so called cycling heroes. And I'll say so if I wish. Forget about your doped up heroes and be one yourself. Much more rewarding.

    Thanks for the cack-handed amateur psychoanalysis of people you don't know and have never shared a beer with, dennis. If you could restrict yourself to arguing with the actual opinions we present, rather than a hypothesised, generalised and stigmatised psychological weakness you assume us to possess, then we might have a more constructive debate. You say you like a good debate, please show it.

    Until then, perhaps you would care to explain to me, as a father of children who are interested in a career in sport, how I shouldn't see doping as a problem.

    Thanks in advance.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • dennisn
    dennisn Posts: 10,601
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    perhaps you would care to explain to me, as a father of children who are interested in a career in sport, how I shouldn't see doping as a problem.

    It's all on you to raise your kids properly and guide them through the formative years(and even beyond). You need to be their hero, as opposed to whomever the hot cyclist or football player is at the moment. They WILL encounter drugs along life's path. You can only hope that you have instilled in them the ability to make the correct decisions.
    You're worried about your children. I understand that. Concentrate on them instead of sports dopers. Show them the right way, because you're sure not going to accomplish anything worrying about which pro is taking what and when.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,692
    dennisn wrote:
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    perhaps you would care to explain to me, as a father of children who are interested in a career in sport, how I shouldn't see doping as a problem.

    It's all on you to raise your kids properly and guide them through the formative years(and even beyond). You need to be their hero, as opposed to whomever the hot cyclist or football player is at the moment. They WILL encounter drugs along life's path. You can only hope that you have instilled in them the ability to make the correct decisions.
    You're worried about your children. I understand that. Concentrate on them instead of sports dopers. Show them the right way, because you're sure not going to accomplish anything worrying about which pro is taking what and when.

    Well that missed the point quite spectacularly.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • ddraver
    ddraver Posts: 26,717
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    Well that missed the point quite spectacularly.

    You ve met dennis before havent you doc? Irrelevancy is all he knows...
    We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
    - @ddraver
  • wallace_and_gromit
    wallace_and_gromit Posts: 3,696
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    dennisn wrote:
    No tA Doctor wrote:
    perhaps you would care to explain to me, as a father of children who are interested in a career in sport, how I shouldn't see doping as a problem.

    It's all on you to raise your kids properly and guide them through the formative years(and even beyond). You need to be their hero, as opposed to whomever the hot cyclist or football player is at the moment. They WILL encounter drugs along life's path. You can only hope that you have instilled in them the ability to make the correct decisions.
    You're worried about your children. I understand that. Concentrate on them instead of sports dopers. Show them the right way, because you're sure not going to accomplish anything worrying about which pro is taking what and when.

    Well that missed the point quite spectacularly.

    Dennis's point is a very good one. If as a parent you need sportsmen/women to show your children how to conduct themselves then something is badly wrong. Though this wasn't Not_a_doctor's point, to my interpretation.

    Not_a_doctor's point is also pertinent. The good news is that on the balance of probabilities, doping won't be an issue to his/her kids, as they won't be good enough for it to make a real difference to their lives. All but a very small proportion of folk simply find their own modest level at which to lose, and if you encounter doping in amateur sport then it will just make you lose at, for example, Cat 3 rather than Cat 2. No big deal on the grand scale of things, so long as sound parental advice is given about what's right, what's wrong, choices and consequences etc.

    If your kids are good enough for doping to make a meaningful difference to life and career choices then at least you have an option that most don't have, and also the ability to perform at a level of which most of us can only dream.

    I'm not saying PEDs are OK or aren't an issue, but their implications are actually very limited. (Legal drugs and popular illegal recreational ones are much issue on my parenting radar.)
  • shinyhelmut
    shinyhelmut Posts: 1,364
    Ignoring the philosophical discussion of the purpose of this thread, here's a good summary of the list and the implications;

    http://www.scienceofrunning.com/2014/12/everything-you-need-to-know-about.html?m=1
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    There are some rumours circulating as to the identity of the British athlete on the suspicious list. It won't be very good PR for her if it is true.
  • RichN95.
    RichN95. Posts: 27,262
    Joelsim wrote:
    There are some rumours circulating as to the identity of the British athlete on the suspicious list. It won't be very good PR for her if it is true.
    Is it Lord McAlpine?
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    Eric Pickles. He was found to have excess cake in his bloodstream
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,692
    Wallace and Gromit wrote:

    Dennis's point is a very good one. If as a parent you need sportsmen/women to show your children how to conduct themselves then something is badly wrong. Though this wasn't Not_a_doctor's point, to my interpretation.

    Not_a_doctor's point is also pertinent. The good news is that on the balance of probabilities, doping won't be an issue to his/her kids, as they won't be good enough for it to make a real difference to their lives. All but a very small proportion of folk simply find their own modest level at which to lose, and if you encounter doping in amateur sport then it will just make you lose at, for example, Cat 3 rather than Cat 2. No big deal on the grand scale of things, so long as sound parental advice is given about what's right, what's wrong, choices and consequences etc.

    If your kids are good enough for doping to make a meaningful difference to life and career choices then at least you have an option that most don't have, and also the ability to perform at a level of which most of us can only dream.

    I'm not saying PEDs are OK or aren't an issue, but their implications are actually very limited. (Legal drugs and popular illegal recreational ones are much issue on my parenting radar.)

    I don't point out sportspeople as role models in any way except how they perform in their sport, so that's really not an issue for me. In fact, wrt team sports, I've always encouraged them to support their team, rather than idolise the players.

    While it's a very slim chance indeed of any of my kids making a career in sport it is actually a concrete possibility for at least one of them, if he chooses to go that direction. And given the amount of dedication required to become elite in sport that means it's a decision he will make, whether consciously or unconsciously, sooner rather than later - he's 11 now. That makes the question of PEDs relevant to me. Put it this way: if you'd been a dad to 10 year old in 1980 who was passionate about cycling and showed real aptitude, dreamed of being a pro-cyclist and was working hard to get there, but you knew then what you know now about what cycling looked like in the 90s, what would you say to him?
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • Zerotails99
    Zerotails99 Posts: 127
    You ought to be more worried about your kid descending at 70mph down the mountains.

    11 year olds these days cant even do their homework unless they're jacked up on caffeine. We live in a pharmaceutical world. The Therapeutic use exemption allows athletes to take any drugs with a prescription. I dont know why people make a big fuss over the micro dosing of PEDs
  • Zerotails99
    Zerotails99 Posts: 127
    People don't go to watch regular people doing their jobs. They wanna see super human performances.
  • No_Ta_Doctor
    No_Ta_Doctor Posts: 14,692
    Zerotails99 wrote:
    You ought to be more worried about your kid descending at 70mph down the mountains.

    11 year olds these days cant even do their homework unless they're jacked up on caffeine. We live in a pharmaceutical world. The Therapeutic use exemption allows athletes to take any drugs with a prescription. I dont know why people make a big fuss over the micro dosing of PEDs

    Well this thread was about other sports. My kid isn't a cyclist. The sports he's interested in have zero risk in comparison.

    And my kids don't drink caffeine.
    Warning No formatter is installed for the format
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 22,025
    The good folk of let's run forum have worked out that one of the Brits must be Kate Reed. I think the forum must be the equivalent of the asylum, but nonetheless it is solid detective work.

    I'm still intrigued who the major British star is. Although I have my suspicions.
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    Let's just say if it's who it is rumoured to be it may get a little shi*ty
  • Zerotails99
    Zerotails99 Posts: 127
    I was talking about in General. most people are regularly using some sort of stimulants or drugs so they can do their jobs. athletes are no different. in the grand scheme of things, compared to everything else, the risk posed by Micro dosing PEDs are extremely small providing it is properly supervised by a doctor.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 22,025
    I do enjoy the detective skills employed on things like this. A lot of people point to Christine Ohuruogu, but one of the national papers that knows who it is used the phrased "unblemmished career", so apparently, that means it can't be her due to her previous sanction.
  • DeadCalm
    DeadCalm Posts: 4,249
    TheBigBean wrote:
    I do enjoy the detective skills employed on things like this. A lot of people point to Christine Ohuruogu, but one of the national papers that knows who it is used the phrased "unblemmished career", so apparently, that means it can't be her due to her previous sanction.
    I really hope it isn't the person that Race Radio suggested it is on twitter.
  • joelsim
    joelsim Posts: 7,552
    DeadCalm wrote:
    TheBigBean wrote:
    I do enjoy the detective skills employed on things like this. A lot of people point to Christine Ohuruogu, but one of the national papers that knows who it is used the phrased "unblemmished career", so apparently, that means it can't be her due to her previous sanction.
    I really hope it isn't the person that Race Radio suggested it is on twitter.

    Exactly. Would be very bad for PR

Categories