So how should Contadors palmares be viewed now ?

singlespeedexplosif wrote:

That fact he is a drug fueled cheat makes no difference to you then ?

For drug fueled cheat read 'professional cyclist'. I like watching pro cycling, and the more exciting the better. I'd much rather the sort of edge-of-your-seat Tour we've had in the last few years than the sort of procession we had 7 years on the trot with a certain other drug-fuelled cheat...hence the only disappointment to me is the ban.

Fine - have a drug fuelled free for all and do away with testing. Go down the pro wrestling route and turn the 'sport' into an entertainment. In the mean time could there also be a break away sport (maybe Continuity-Pro-Cycling) in which the cyclists are tested, hopefully clean of dope, slower, so that we could find out what cyclists like Graham Obree might have been able to do? If so, I'll watch the slower, more boring, latter.

singlespeedexplosif wrote:

Go down the pro wrestling route and turn the 'sport' into an entertainment.
why?

On reflection, I thin kI got the point in your post muddled up - I thought you were suggesting that doped up cyclists made the sport more interesting and so should be forgiven/tolerated... apologies if I got that wrong.

Fools rush in... :oops:

Arkibal wrote:

Moray Gub wrote:

That fact he is a drug fueled cheat makes no difference to you then ?

Not really, it's not like he won the races by minutes like, eh, a certain someone did.

So would I be right in thinking you don't mind Contador cheating but you don't like the idea that Lance did? If so, that's a pretty bizarre point of view.