The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
auscyclefan94 said:good for you, a guy who is a drug cheat & who can't admit it is your hero. I liked the guy as well but i can't respect him now for what he has done.
).Animal said:Latest news is that he'll work for Contador in next year's Tour.
Yeah. That's gonna happen.
auscyclefan94 said:
Zen Master said:Sorry mate but why ?!! Because he hesitated to sign the anti-doping agreement with Katusha perhaps !?
Astarloza, Ricco and ( retired ) Kohl !? Woooooooooooow all big peloton guns in one place, simply amazing bravery !??
Oh, oh, oh what a hero !?!
Eva Maria said:
joe_papp said:haha - not this year, though I'm out on the bike 5-7x/week
Bala Verde said:Well, let us know when you are back.
We'll start a 'Joe Papp' thread that'll specify all the victory salutes you'd need to execute when you cross the line (first). And other silly, but also supportive stuff
), but if you're not walking away with millions to go with your suspension, holy sh*t - there's no way doping is worth it. , what is true is that I went from living what I considered at the time to be a rather charmed existence to having worse than nothing. It's one thing to be an anonymous loser. It's another thing entirely to have no resources to deploy in the advancement of your life AND to be portrayed in the public record as a complete and total unethical, cheating b*stard with absolutely no redeeming qualities. Holy sh*t! joe_papp said:lol it would be nice to win again (cleanly, like I did from 1989-2001)...but I can't believe I'm 34 already...like, where did all that time go? Not to hijack this thread, but one thing that I think gets lost in the hate-slinging that characterizes a typical unsympathetic view towards athletes who've served a ban and want to get back into cycling is the fact that - what else are they going to do? You're talking about guys who have 15-20 years invested in the sport, and putting aside whatever personal anger one might feel towards a convicted doper, seriously - what do you counsel them to do with their lives? Starting over at age 30+ is not easy (though of course people have to do it all the time), and even if a guy doped, that still doesn't change the fact that he has 15-20 years worth of experience in a particular field - which many would seemingly deny him the chance to re-enter, despite having served a ban. Of course you can argue in typical black/white fashion that even someone who has only one doping violation and is ostensibly reformed should be ostracized, hated-upon and blacklisted from the sport (MR?). But it's not like there are job retraining programs that provide any help in transitioning out of cycling and into something completely different. Even prison is supposed to rehabilitate the offender so they can become productive members of society.
I'm still surprised at the savagery that dwells within people who blast away at the ex-doper and demand his banishment, even when the rules allow him to return. It's like you're saying he is nonredeemable, it doesn't matter what price he's already paid, and he should be given a psychological and material death sentence - either to make an example of him for others, or to satisfy your own blood lust.
I'm not taking this solely from my own personal experience, but if the UCI or USADA or WADA or a coaches' association or ...(you get the picture)... asked me what I personally would say to discourage a cyclist tempted by doping, it wouldn't be to emphasize that there is a health risk. Rather, I'd tell them that if they dope and get caught, there will be no mercy whatsoever shown to them by anyone, and they are going to be cast out of normal society and left to fend for themselves with whatever non-cycling skill set or resources they can scrape together.
Michael Schermer wrote an article for Scientific American entitled "The Doping Dilemma," in which he tried to identify the incentives and disincentives to doping. It might make sense (in a cynical kinda way) to juice if in doing so you were likely to bank millions of euros that you otherwise wouldn't earn (never mind the fact that the money would be tainted - much like Thor's green jersey - lol
If I knew how my life would implode, and how much hate I would be subjected to by strangers, how I would lose most of the friendships I had cultivated over two decades (Which were primarily with other cyclists, who came to fear being outed by me for their own doping and so broke contact), and how difficult it would be to re-enter normal society in any productive way - I would never, ever, ever have thought for a second about doping. I would have stayed right where I was or quit the sport. Why? Because look at it: I didn't walk away with millions, I'm 34, I dedicated 20 years of my life to this sport, and none of that counts for anything right now when it comes to surviving day in and day out.
My cycling career ended with me having *nothing* to show for it, as the doping conviction invalidated everything from race results to whatever aura of achievement and capacity for success I'd cultivated. Granted, someone like Basso, who got caught, admitted nothing really, and was able to return to the sport at the same level with the same earning potential is a bad example, but for the vast majority of riders whose careers are ended by a doping violation, the long-term cost far outweighs whatever gains they made while doped (FL as an example, perhaps? no wife, no father-in-law, no big house, no big bank account...racing for a domestic team, not even doing that well, and getting humiliating fines for littering during races that he probably thought he'd never have to ride again).
Some blogger wrote that the article on me that appeared in Outside magazine last year portrayed me as an epic loser. While that's not entirely accurate
I write this not because I want sympathy, as the public has shown for the most part that they're typically not willing to offer, but rather to chronicle the real-life price paid by the doper and how it is almost impossible to argue that this cost is worth whatever transitory gains were experienced on the bike.
180mmCrank said:I think we need that bloke from the Da Vinci Code on here - what's his name...
Tom Hanks
joe_papp said:lol it would be nice to win again (cleanly, like I did from 1989-2001)...but I can't believe I'm 34 already...like, where did all that time go? Not to hijack this thread, but one thing that I think gets lost in the hate-slinging that characterizes a typical unsympathetic view towards athletes who've served a ban and want to get back into cycling is the fact that - what else are they going to do? You're talking about guys who have 15-20 years invested in the sport, and putting aside whatever personal anger one might feel towards a convicted doper, seriously - what do you counsel them to do with their lives? Starting over at age 30+ is not easy (though of course people have to do it all the time), and even if a guy doped, that still doesn't change the fact that he has 15-20 years worth of experience in a particular field - which many would seemingly deny him the chance to re-enter, despite having served a ban. Of course you can argue in typical black/white fashion that even someone who has only one doping violation and is ostensibly reformed should be ostracized, hated-upon and blacklisted from the sport (MR?). But it's not like there are job retraining programs that provide any help in transitioning out of cycling and into something completely different. Even prison is supposed to rehabilitate the offender so they can become productive members of society.
I'm still surprised at the savagery that dwells within people who blast away at the ex-doper and demand his banishment, even when the rules allow him to return. It's like you're saying he is nonredeemable, it doesn't matter what price he's already paid, and he should be given a psychological and material death sentence - either to make an example of him for others, or to satisfy your own blood lust.
I'm not taking this solely from my own personal experience, but if the UCI or USADA or WADA or a coaches' association or ...(you get the picture)... asked me what I personally would say to discourage a cyclist tempted by doping, it wouldn't be to emphasize that there is a health risk. Rather, I'd tell them that if they dope and get caught, there will be no mercy whatsoever shown to them by anyone, and they are going to be cast out of normal society and left to fend for themselves with whatever non-cycling skill set or resources they can scrape together.
Michael Schermer wrote an article for Scientific American entitled "The Doping Dilemma," in which he tried to identify the incentives and disincentives to doping. It might make sense (in a cynical kinda way) to juice if in doing so you were likely to bank millions of euros that you otherwise wouldn't earn (never mind the fact that the money would be tainted - much like Thor's green jersey - lol
If I knew how my life would implode, and how much hate I would be subjected to by strangers, how I would lose most of the friendships I had cultivated over two decades (Which were primarily with other cyclists, who came to fear being outed by me for their own doping and so broke contact), and how difficult it would be to re-enter normal society in any productive way - I would never, ever, ever have thought for a second about doping. I would have stayed right where I was or quit the sport. Why? Because look at it: I didn't walk away with millions, I'm 34, I dedicated 20 years of my life to this sport, and none of that counts for anything right now when it comes to surviving day in and day out.
My cycling career ended with me having *nothing* to show for it, as the doping conviction invalidated everything from race results to whatever aura of achievement and capacity for success I'd cultivated. Granted, someone like Basso, who got caught, admitted nothing really, and was able to return to the sport at the same level with the same earning potential is a bad example, but for the vast majority of riders whose careers are ended by a doping violation, the long-term cost far outweighs whatever gains they made while doped (FL as an example, perhaps? no wife, no father-in-law, no big house, no big bank account...racing for a domestic team, not even doing that well, and getting humiliating fines for littering during races that he probably thought he'd never have to ride again).
Some blogger wrote that the article on me that appeared in Outside magazine last year portrayed me as an epic loser. While that's not entirely accurate
I write this not because I want sympathy, as the public has shown for the most part that they're typically not willing to offer, but rather to chronicle the real-life price paid by the doper and how it is almost impossible to argue that this cost is worth whatever transitory gains were experienced on the bike.
Thoughtforfood said:
joe_papp said:lol it would be nice to win again (cleanly, like I did from 1989-2001)...but I can't believe I'm 34 already...like, where did all that time go? Not to hijack this thread, but one thing that I think gets lost in the hate-slinging that characterizes a typical unsympathetic view towards athletes who've served a ban and want to get back into cycling is the fact that - what else are they going to do? You're talking about guys who have 15-20 years invested in the sport, and putting aside whatever personal anger one might feel towards a convicted doper, seriously - what do you counsel them to do with their lives? Starting over at age 30+ is not easy (though of course people have to do it all the time), and even if a guy doped, that still doesn't change the fact that he has 15-20 years worth of experience in a particular field - which many would seemingly deny him the chance to re-enter, despite having served a ban. Of course you can argue in typical black/white fashion that even someone who has only one doping violation and is ostensibly reformed should be ostracized, hated-upon and blacklisted from the sport (MR?). But it's not like there are job retraining programs that provide any help in transitioning out of cycling and into something completely different. Even prison is supposed to rehabilitate the offender so they can become productive members of society.
I'm still surprised at the savagery that dwells within people who blast away at the ex-doper and demand his banishment, even when the rules allow him to return. It's like you're saying he is nonredeemable, it doesn't matter what price he's already paid, and he should be given a psychological and material death sentence - either to make an example of him for others, or to satisfy your own blood lust.
I'm not taking this solely from my own personal experience, but if the UCI or USADA or WADA or a coaches' association or ...(you get the picture)... asked me what I personally would say to discourage a cyclist tempted by doping, it wouldn't be to emphasize that there is a health risk. Rather, I'd tell them that if they dope and get caught, there will be no mercy whatsoever shown to them by anyone, and they are going to be cast out of normal society and left to fend for themselves with whatever non-cycling skill set or resources they can scrape together.
Michael Schermer wrote an article for Scientific American entitled "The Doping Dilemma," in which he tried to identify the incentives and disincentives to doping. It might make sense (in a cynical kinda way) to juice if in doing so you were likely to bank millions of euros that you otherwise wouldn't earn (never mind the fact that the money would be tainted - much like Thor's green jersey - lol
If I knew how my life would implode, and how much hate I would be subjected to by strangers, how I would lose most of the friendships I had cultivated over two decades (Which were primarily with other cyclists, who came to fear being outed by me for their own doping and so broke contact), and how difficult it would be to re-enter normal society in any productive way - I would never, ever, ever have thought for a second about doping. I would have stayed right where I was or quit the sport. Why? Because look at it: I didn't walk away with millions, I'm 34, I dedicated 20 years of my life to this sport, and none of that counts for anything right now when it comes to surviving day in and day out.
My cycling career ended with me having *nothing* to show for it, as the doping conviction invalidated everything from race results to whatever aura of achievement and capacity for success I'd cultivated. Granted, someone like Basso, who got caught, admitted nothing really, and was able to return to the sport at the same level with the same earning potential is a bad example, but for the vast majority of riders whose careers are ended by a doping violation, the long-term cost far outweighs whatever gains they made while doped (FL as an example, perhaps? no wife, no father-in-law, no big house, no big bank account...racing for a domestic team, not even doing that well, and getting humiliating fines for littering during races that he probably thought he'd never have to ride again).
Some blogger wrote that the article on me that appeared in Outside magazine last year portrayed me as an epic loser. While that's not entirely accurate
I write this not because I want sympathy, as the public has shown for the most part that they're typically not willing to offer, but rather to chronicle the real-life price paid by the doper and how it is almost impossible to argue that this cost is worth whatever transitory gains were experienced on the bike.
joe_papp said:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram