Inga Thompson - and "cleaning house" - CyclingNews Forum

Go Back   CyclingNews Forum > Road > The Clinic

The Clinic The Clinic is the only place on Cyclingnews where you can discuss doping-related issues. Ask questions, discuss positives or improvements to procedures.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-07-12, 15:05
hiero2's Avatar
hiero2 hiero2 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: In Descartes' reality
Posts: 2,542
Default Inga Thompson - and "cleaning house"

Inga Thompson posted this Op-ed in VN:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/...forward_267849

What a wonderfully written piece! I found it magnificently appealing, and wonderful to hear the DOWN side from somebody who has a legitimate complaint that she got results stolen from her. She was no 2nd team wanna-be. Now, leaving aside the question that we must ask, i.e. "Is she being honest in claiming to be clean?" - I will assume this to be true. I think her points are valid regardless.

My first thought, on reading her op-ed, were of the many people here in the clinic who say something similar - we have to go back and clean house. She makes the point VERY convincingly. She almost convinces me 100%.

I love her answer for handling the situation with her own child. Good thinking on her part. Except that many HS football programs see steroid abuse.

My first response was to show this to all those people talking about cleaning house throughout the past. As validation of what they think. Except I thought about it for a little while, and I realize there is a flaw in her thinking. It is right here:
Quote:
Would you hand your son or daughter over to a program if you knew the people overseeing them were ex-drug addicts doing cocaine, meth or heroin?
My first response is "this makes sense!" But, then, like I said, I thought about it. Let's replace the drugs mentioned with another - alcohol. Would you trust a reformed alcoholic to run a program for alcoholics? Notice I don't say EX-alcoholic, since people who have been dry for ever so many years don't allow themselves to say it that way. But, if you were wise, you wouldn't trust ANYBODY else to run a program for quitting alcohol. It takes an addict to understand addiction. Anybody else only has a 2nd-best idea of what that's like. Can a man every fully understand the pain that a woman feels when giving birth? No. Can someone who has never killed understand what it is like in battle? No. One can empathize, sympathize, and extrapolate so they have some idea, but it will never be quite the same.

I say Thompson is right when she says we need to achieve transparency for those years. We have a lot more today than we did a year ago, but it isn't all done yet. I have to agree with the transparency. Without the transparency, we fans will never KNOW enough to believe our current stars are clean.

But we don't need to completely purge those who were involved. Reform IS possible, and in this case, it is desirable. It takes a thief, or someone who thinks like a thief, to catch a thief. That's why the personality profiles of policemen are VERY much like the criminals they catch.

Which brings us back to what many people here have called for before: accountability, and transparency. Transparency for the past is no good without accountability for actions in the present. And when you can't have full accountability, and we know that drug testing will never be that good, then accountability in the present means that transparency for the past is essential.
__________________
It is of great use to the sailor to know the length of his line, though he cannot with it fathom all the depths of the ocean. ~ John Locke
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-07-12, 15:29
Dazed and Confused Dazed and Confused is online now
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 8,267
Default

Don't know Mrs Thompson, but her stance on the situation is very similar to mine.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-07-12, 15:46
MarkvW's Avatar
MarkvW MarkvW is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,234
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiero2 View Post
Inga Thompson posted this Op-ed in VN:

http://velonews.competitor.com/2012/...forward_267849

What a wonderfully written piece! I found it magnificently appealing, and wonderful to hear the DOWN side from somebody who has a legitimate complaint that she got results stolen from her. She was no 2nd team wanna-be. Now, leaving aside the question that we must ask, i.e. "Is she being honest in claiming to be clean?" - I will assume this to be true. I think her points are valid regardless.

My first thought, on reading her op-ed, were of the many people here in the clinic who say something similar - we have to go back and clean house. She makes the point VERY convincingly. She almost convinces me 100%.

I love her answer for handling the situation with her own child. Good thinking on her part. Except that many HS football programs see steroid abuse.

My first response was to show this to all those people talking about cleaning house throughout the past. As validation of what they think. Except I thought about it for a little while, and I realize there is a flaw in her thinking. It is right here: My first response is "this makes sense!" But, then, like I said, I thought about it. Let's replace the drugs mentioned with another - alcohol. Would you trust a reformed alcoholic to run a program for alcoholics? Notice I don't say EX-alcoholic, since people who have been dry for ever so many years don't allow themselves to say it that way. But, if you were wise, you wouldn't trust ANYBODY else to run a program for quitting alcohol. It takes an addict to understand addiction. Anybody else only has a 2nd-best idea of what that's like. Can a man every fully understand the pain that a woman feels when giving birth? No. Can someone who has never killed understand what it is like in battle? No. One can empathize, sympathize, and extrapolate so they have some idea, but it will never be quite the same.

I say Thompson is right when she says we need to achieve transparency for those years. We have a lot more today than we did a year ago, but it isn't all done yet. I have to agree with the transparency. Without the transparency, we fans will never KNOW enough to believe our current stars are clean.

But we don't need to completely purge those who were involved. Reform IS possible, and in this case, it is desirable. It takes a thief, or someone who thinks like a thief, to catch a thief. That's why the personality profiles of policemen are VERY much like the criminals they catch.

Which brings us back to what many people here have called for before: accountability, and transparency. Transparency for the past is no good without accountability for actions in the present. And when you can't have full accountability, and we know that drug testing will never be that good, then accountability in the present means that transparency for the past is essential.
I believe Lyne Bessette has also written about her perspective of the Jeanson years.
__________________
Dr. Maserati, my friend, don't you start away uneasy.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-07-12, 15:55
Aleajactaest Aleajactaest is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hiero2 View Post
My first response was to show this to all those people talking about cleaning house throughout the past. As validation of what they think. Except I thought about it for a little while, and I realize there is a flaw in her thinking. It is right here: My first response is "this makes sense!" But, then, like I said, I thought about it. Let's replace the drugs mentioned with another - alcohol. Would you trust a reformed alcoholic to run a program for alcoholics? Notice I don't say EX-alcoholic, since people who have been dry for ever so many years don't allow themselves to say it that way. But, if you were wise, you wouldn't trust ANYBODY else to run a program for quitting alcohol. It takes an addict to understand addiction. Anybody else only has a 2nd-best idea of what that's like. Can a man every fully understand the pain that a woman feels when giving birth? No. Can someone who has never killed understand what it is like in battle? No. One can empathize, sympathize, and extrapolate so they have some idea, but it will never be quite the same.
I agree with much of her article and your analysis but I think the above metaphor is wrong.

Alcohol and recreational drug use have addictive qualities that make giving them up more difficult. (food for that matter falls into that category) Using PED's for most people tends to be limited to the period under which it gains you an advantage. I don't think that applies.

My issue with keeping them is ethical. If they can make the moral decision to do it once, I believe it reveals a willingness to ignore other rules of convenience when they too run counter to your goals. I don't think that anyone with a history of PED usage/tolerance etc could be associated with any new regime without there always being some doubt.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-07-12, 16:03
dpcowboy's Avatar
dpcowboy dpcowboy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SoCal
Posts: 9
Default

Inga is right...and the conditions she describes for truly starting cycling again without the doping are correct...I think the key to her comments is that she accurately describes
the coaches, DS's, and trainers as "semi-repentant"....and that, my friends, is spot on.

Thousands of racing cyclists chose NOT to dope, and because of their personal moral courage, had to abandon their dreams of cycling, at least on the professional scene. How can anyone support or give any credit to any of these confessed dopers. They are immoral, unethical jerks, who, like a lot of convicts, finally feel guilty. Big deal...go crawl under a rock and find another means of employment.
I do not want to see one more article, book, interview, Gran Fondo, or reinstatement....just go away and find another path....that should be their punishment...to disappear.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-07-12, 16:16
mountainrman mountainrman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 375
Default

I have long thought the arguments about "less doping in womens cycling" to be bull. And this bitterly proves the point.

I also think she was lucky rather than just well principled. She was born in an era that allowed her to fulfill some of her potential before the hard decisions came, like Andy Hampsten who could "decide not to play" after winning a giro and retire when faced with the choice.
Such as Tyler Hamilton who were in that sense entering at the worst time when doping was the majority choice. You cannot be blamed for being born when you were..

As to what to do about it - that is harder.

Don't think she should use her own anger to deny a future for her son, that gave her her own identity and she should trust her son to make the right decisions.

She should find a way to encourage him. It seems to me far fewer track cyclists have been involved in scandals over the years so maybe she could justify to herself encouraging him in that without sacrificing her beliefs.

Hopefully in another five years the problem in road racing will become minor. because of such comprehensive biometric testing catching cheats. It will never disappear completely.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-09-12, 04:59
reginagold reginagold is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 192
Default

She has made a sound request not yet discussed in this thread. Do testing on all the stored samples and let's see who was and wasn't playing the Lance game.

She says placings and prize money were stolen from her, and now her entire career is being stolen from her as doper after doper pushes to sell their self serving message - everybody did it. So many, in fact, we need a Truth and Reconciliation program? Excuse me, voluntarily giving yourself an illegal sporting advantage equates with the murders and other human rights violations under apartheid?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-09-12, 09:06
mountainrman mountainrman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 375
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by reginagold View Post
She has made a sound request not yet discussed in this thread. Do testing on all the stored samples and let's see who was and wasn't playing the Lance game.

She says placings and prize money were stolen from her, and now her entire career is being stolen from her as doper after doper pushes to sell their self serving message - everybody did it. So many, in fact, we need a Truth and Reconciliation program? Excuse me, voluntarily giving yourself an illegal sporting advantage equates with the murders and other human rights violations under apartheid?
I think it would prove what we already suspect or know,that almost ALL were doing the same or similar except for the few old hands with extensive palmares who retired rather than got involved when the peloton speeded up in the mid / late nineties. That is the problem with blaming and sanctioning one man, or one team. It is unrepresentative. When they are all shown guilty what do you do?

It seems better to me draw a line in the sand at a much later date, say 2006 by which time more were hopefully racing clean - and then yes - retest all samples when major new breakthroughs in testing come.

Last edited by mountainrman; 12-09-12 at 09:09.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-09-12, 10:25
skippy's Avatar
skippy skippy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 424
Send a message via Skype™ to skippy
Default

Members of ALL Forums would do well to take what INGA has to say as just the tip of the Iceberg ! In the current atmosphere she has the courage to make CLEAR the extent of the Doping PROBLEM !

4050+ have signed on with www.changecyclingnow.org petition !

HAVE ANY OF YOU ?

Until critical mass is achieved phat & heinous will give us ALL the finger ! They think they are in an Impregnable fortress hidden behind the Constitution they have constructed !

Unless the Swiss Authorities act , they are going to enjoy passing out the " goodies " to the 42 Delegates that can influence their future well being ! Not too many of the 42 will act , in a way , that removes them from the swill trough , where they have their snouts firmly entrenched !

This forum is a joke for phats of aigle , bedtime dreaming material !

LETS GET TOGETHER and disabuse those that think Cycling Fans are POWERLESS and COMPLACENT !

Show support for ANY initiative that alerts the MEDIA to the unrest that exists . YOU can start by creating a better worded Petition than these :
http://www.change.org/petitions/wada...-in-all-sports
&
http://www.change.org/en-GB/petition...stralia#invite


http://www.facebook.com/AmnestyForAl...ax_wizard=true
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-09-12, 11:49
frenchfry's Avatar
frenchfry frenchfry is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Bourgogne
Posts: 1,625
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mountainrman View Post
I think it would prove what we already suspect or know,that almost ALL were doing the same or similar except for the few old hands with extensive palmares who retired rather than got involved when the peloton speeded up in the mid / late nineties. That is the problem with blaming and sanctioning one man, or one team. It is unrepresentative. When they are all shown guilty what do you do?

It seems better to me draw a line in the sand at a much later date, say 2006 by which time more were hopefully racing clean - and then yes - retest all samples when major new breakthroughs in testing come.
You are right, they were all doing the same thing.

Except of course those who weren't doing it.

Not to forget those who dropped out of the sport because they didn't want to do the same thing.

So in fact, you are totally out to lunch with your "all doing it" crap.There is nothing that plisses me off more than the "level playing field" "they were all doing it" doping apologists like you.
__________________
"C'est une triste chose de songer que la nature parle et que le genre humain n'ecoute pas" - Victor Hugo
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:05.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited. All rights reserved. Future Publishing Limited is part of the Future plc group. Future Publishing Limited is a company registered in England and Wales with company registration number 2008885 whose registered office is at Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW England.