Are other sports as dirty as cycling?

[Christian]

I don't know if the name Biathlon rings a bell to those outside of Europe (even though the US has a pretty good contender in Jay Hakkinen), but it's a combination between cross country skiing and shooting (sounds weird, I know, but it's actually really exciting). Anyways, biathlon, along with regular cross coutry skiing are, in my humble opinion, not very "clean" at all. I don't know exactly how strict controls are there, but every so often you hear of a Russian or Belarus contender being disqualified for doping.
Great sport though, if you ever get the chance to see a race, do it!

 

[Archibald]

I am having a real good laugh about tennis.

Very few doping controls, and pros have the right to refuse 3 dope tests a year. I heard that Nadal was only tested 3 times in the off season. Yet still he whines about the controls.

You don't even need to bother using masking agents or cycling the dosage if you can refuse the tests.

Look at Andy Murray - last year he was a tall and skinny boy. He emerged this spring looking like Conan the Barbarian, and claims it was all down to bikram yoga and eating sushi. Like Nadal he then had a big whine about how out of competition testing was an invasion of privacy.

With his new muscle man body he is hitting the ball really hard, winning more and earning more. It ****es me off that the public and the media are too stupid to see what is going on.

Gabrielle Sabatini, anyone??

 

[nobody]

Gabrielle Sabatini, anyone??

Don't touch at that lady !

 

[gjdavis60]

I think a pretty good example of just how far professional athletes go was the recent banning of a NASCAR driver. I'm not a fan of the sport so I don't really follow it but meth apparently gives enough of an edge for the drivers to risk getting busted. I've also heard that this guy was one of the stars of the sport.

Jeremy Mayfield was suspended indefinitely by NASCAR, but they will not disclose exactly what banned substances were found. Mayfield is suing, so it may all come out in court anyway. Unlike cycling, NASCAR's testing protocols are not disclosed, and penalties are tailored to each situation.

NASCAR is a case in point of a sanctioning body that tightly controls its sport and the information it disseminates. Contrast this to cycling where sanctioning bodies locked in pitched battles for control of the sport use doping as a PR weapon against each other.

Guess which sport "seems" dirtier?

If you consider all forms of cheating, I would venture that NASCAR (and most forms of professional motorsport) in fact has a far more serious and systemic problem than cycling. Every year there are countless incidents of cheating ("rules violations") uncovered and punished. In F1 cheating runs the gamut from the most ingenious engineering (Honda's fuel tank within a fuel tank) to baldfaced lying (Hamilton and McLaren this year in Australia).

Yet, most people probably think cycling is "dirtier" than motorsport. It's all about perception.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Gabrielle Sabatini, anyone??

 

[Anonymous]

Jeremy Mayfield was suspended indefinitely by NASCAR, but they will not disclose exactly what banned substances were found. Mayfield is suing, so it may all come out in court anyway. Unlike cycling, NASCAR's testing protocols are not disclosed, and penalties are tailored to each situation.

NASCAR is a case in point of a sanctioning body that tightly controls its sport and the information it disseminates. Contrast this to cycling where sanctioning bodies locked in pitched battles for control of the sport use doping as a PR weapon against each other.

Guess which sport "seems" dirtier?

If you consider all forms of cheating, I would venture that NASCAR (and most forms of professional motorsport) in fact has a far more serious and systemic problem than cycling. Every year there are countless incidents of cheating ("rules violations") uncovered and punished. In F1 cheating runs the gamut from the most ingenious engineering (Honda's fuel tank within a fuel tank) to baldfaced lying (Hamilton and McLaren this year in Australia).

Yet, most people probably think cycling is "dirtier" than motorsport. It's all about perception.

i don't think that if the riders where hiding gizmos in their bikes to make them faster we'd be having the same discussion.

it is different and is why auto racing has banned drivers for involvement with drugs while a team get's a several race suspension for a crew chief for sneaking something past inspections.

in auto racing "if you ain't cheatin' you ain't trying".

I do remember a pro stock drag racer that got a year ban for hiding a nitrous bottle in his oil tank.... they found out about it when it blew up in the pits between rounds.. i was there.. lol

 

[boalio]

i don't think that if the riders where hiding gizmos in their bikes to make them faster we'd be having the same discussion.

it is different ...

how is it different?

 

[BroDeal]

how is it different?

It's not other than auto racing has always accepted cheating. The cheating is usually fairly minor. It is a team sneaking a gizmo on the car that does not meet the spec in the regulations. It is usually not using a 4.5 liter engine in place of a 3.5 liter one. Big cheating would produce a similar reaction among the fans as doping in cycling.

Also most of auto racing has become, to a large degree, a fake sport even though the fans may not believe that. Everything is tightly controlled to produce close racing. They are even further down the pro wrestling road than cycling.

 

[davidg]

hmm, are you saying body builders omit to 'build' one part of their body?

you mean the brain?

 

[cyclingworld]

i'll go for Fotball!!

Got a webcam. Create a Videopoke Now!

 

[Anonymous]

It's not other than auto racing has always accepted cheating. The cheating is usually fairly minor. It is a team sneaking a gizmo on the car that does not meet the spec in the regulations. It is usually not using a 4.5 liter engine in place of a 3.5 liter one. Big cheating would produce a similar reaction among the fans as doping in cycling.

Also most of auto racing has become, to a large degree, a fake sport even though the fans may not believe that. Everything is tightly controlled to produce close racing. They are even further down the pro wrestling road than cycling.

2 great Smokey Yunick stories:
"As with most successful racers, Yunick was a master of the grey area straddling the rules. Perhaps his most famous exploit was his #13 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle, driven by Curtis Turner. The car was so much faster than the competition during testing that they were certain that cheating was involved; some sort of aerodynamic enhancement was strongly suspected, but the car's profile seemed to be entirely stock, as the rules required. It was eventually discovered that what Yunick had built was an exact 7/8 scale replica of the production car. Since then, NASCAR required each race car's roof, hood, and trunk to fit templates representing the production car's exact profile.

Another Yunick improvisation was getting around the regulations specifying a maximum size for the fuel tank, by using eleven foot (three meter) coils of 2-inch (5-centimeter) diameter tubing for the fuel line to add about 5 gallons (19 liters)[1] to the car's fuel capacity. Once, NASCAR officials came up with a list of nine items for Yunick to fix before the car would be allowed on the track. The suspicious NASCAR officials had removed the tank for inspection. Yunick started the car with no gas tank and said "Better make it ten,"[2] and drove it back to the pits. He used a basketball in the fuel tank which could be inflated when the car's fuel capacity was checked and deflated for the race."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smokey_Yunick

 

[BroDeal]

2 great Smokey Yunick stories:
"As with most successful racers, Yunick was a master of the grey area straddling the rules. Perhaps his most famous exploit was his #13 1966 Chevrolet Chevelle, driven by Curtis Turner. The car was so much faster than the competition during testing that they were certain that cheating was involved; some sort of aerodynamic enhancement was strongly suspected, but the car's profile seemed to be entirely stock, as the rules required. It was eventually discovered that what Yunick had built was an exact 7/8 scale replica of the production car. Since then, NASCAR required each race car's roof, hood, and trunk to fit templates representing the production car's exact profile.

Another Yunick improvisation was getting around the regulations specifying a maximum size for the fuel tank, by using eleven foot (three meter) coils of 2-inch (5-centimeter) diameter tubing for the fuel line to add about 5 gallons (19 liters)[1] to the car's fuel capacity. Once, NASCAR officials came up with a list of nine items for Yunick to fix before the car would be allowed on the track. The suspicious NASCAR officials had removed the tank for inspection. Yunick started the car with no gas tank and said "Better make it ten,"[2] and drove it back to the pits. He used a basketball in the fuel tank which could be inflated when the car's fuel capacity was checked and deflated for the race."

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smokey_Yunick

I have heard the 7/8 scale car one. I had not heard the fuel line one. That is hilarious.

I think fans now would be a lot less forgiving for a lot of this stuff now.

 

[gjdavis60]

It's not other than auto racing has always accepted cheating. The cheating is usually fairly minor. It is a team sneaking a gizmo on the car that does not meet the spec in the regulations. It is usually not using a 4.5 liter engine in place of a 3.5 liter one. Big cheating would produce a similar reaction among the fans as doping in cycling.

Also most of auto racing has become, to a large degree, a fake sport even though the fans may not believe that. Everything is tightly controlled to produce close racing. They are even further down the pro wrestling road than cycling.

I think professional motorsport has a pragmatic approach to cheating.

Because the equipment is regulated so tightly, even small deviations from the rules can and do produce significant advantages. A few 10ths of an inch of ride height or a kilo of ballast can make a lot of difference depending on the series.

I agree that sanctioning bodies develop rules that result in close racing; some of them even make competitive adjustments during the season. For most series close racing is a big part of what makes the product marketable.

But as far as motorsport being "fake" like pro wrestling (i.e. scripted outcomes), I have to disagree, or at least ask you to back up your accusation with some examples.

 

[BroDeal]

I agree that sanctioning bodies develop rules that result in close racing; some of them even make competitive adjustments during the season. For most series close racing a big part of what makes the product marketable.

But as far as motorsport being "fake" like pro wrestling (i.e. scripted outcomes), I have to disagree, or at least ask you to back up your accusation with some examples.

I am thinking in terms of the FIA and Formula 1. You can pretty much guess how they will rule on something by how it will tighten up the championship. Not always, but it is a pretty good rule of thumb. I think F1 deliberately writes some of its rules vaguely so they have room to adjust the championship during the season.

 

[tifosa]

Tiniest parts of this dude's body are inside his skull and beneath the lycra. But I'm sure his momma still loves him.

 

[Anonymous]

how is it different?

It's different because taken to it's extreme people die.

People will, and have, pushed themselves to death with doping.

 

[gjdavis60]

I am thinking in terms of the FIA and Formula 1. You can pretty much guess how they will rule on something by how it will tighten up the championship. Not always, but it is a pretty good rule of thumb. I think F1 deliberately writes some of its rules vaguely so they have room to adjust the championship during the season.

Well, F1 is one of the few pro series where close racing does not seem to be a primary objective, at least compared with most other series. How many years did we watch Ferrari and Schumacher clinch the championship months before the end of the season? In fact one of the most frequent criticisms against F1 is the lack of close competition both in races (which some characterize as "parades") and in the championships. We've been treated to a couple of exciting championship seasons lately, but these are exceptions to what have historically been rather predictable outcomes largely due to advantages gained via engineering.

In 2007 the FIA ended what was a close battle for the constructors championship when it disqualified McLaren over the Stepney-gate espionage scandal (and fined them $100 million).

If anything, the FIA seems to be more often criticized for being Ferarri's lackey than erring on the side of closer competition.

 

[gjdavis60]

It's different because taken to it's extreme people die.

People will, and have, pushed themselves to death with doping.

Right. People don't die in motorsports (Senna, Earnhardt, Petty, Ratzenberger, Irwin, Williamson, Cevert ...)

 

[Anonymous]

Right. People don't die in motorsports (Senna, Earnhardt, Petty, Ratzenberger, Irwin, Williamson, Cevert ...)

people don't die in motorsport because of doping.

 

[gjdavis60]

people don't die in motorsport because of doping.

The question was: what is the difference between cheating in motorsports and cheating in cycling? People can die in either activity as a result.

Is the probability of death due to doping in cycling the reason it gets so much more attention than cheating in motorsport? Is that why cycling is perceived as being a "dirty" sport and motorsport, largely, is not?

 

[Epicurus]

The question was: what is the difference between cheating in motorsports and cheating in cycling? People can die in either activity as a result.

Is the probability of death due to doping in cycling the reason it gets so much more attention than cheating in motorsport? Is that why cycling is perceived as being a "dirty" sport and motorsport, largely, is not?

The moral factor is different.

The perception of things varies and is unique to each one of us, according to our character.
Some expressed the opinion that doping is the result of our materialistic world where money rules. For some others, doping is against their cultural and spiritual values.

If we truly believe that "pure" and "athleticism" are synonymous then we are doomed to disappointment and doubt when it comes to professional sports. Not only for the drugs, but for all the devious things committed inside the network in order to win titles and money.

I personally have a neutral stance on the issue and i care more about the show. I have so many enjoyable things to do in my daily life than to feel bad for such problems.

 

[Anonymous]

The question was: what is the difference between cheating in motorsports and cheating in cycling? People can die in either activity as a result.

Is the probability of death due to doping in cycling the reason it gets so much more attention than cheating in motorsport? Is that why cycling is perceived as being a "dirty" sport and motorsport, largely, is not?

No, the question was what's difference in cheating with gizmos and cheating with dope in cycling.

drugs are a minor problem in motorsport, a major problem in cycling.

I acutally think doping is on the wane in cycling, others disagree.

I offer as evidence though that this close to the TDF the favorite came close to changing teams to a team that is supposedly clean knowing that they would test him very rigorously.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

people don't die in motorsport because of doping.

But they really don't die in cycling because of it either. Only a few isolated cases. Even Lyle Alzedo's death was never directly linked to doping, and he took buckets full of drugs for years.

Though I will admit with what you say. Doping is a serious problem in cycling, and a minor problem in motorsports.

And yes, I think cycling is cleaner than recent years. Just not as much as you perhaps. And I don't think they're doing all they could, not even close. But we've had that discussion too many times already.

 

[gjdavis60]

No, the question was what's difference in cheating with gizmos and cheating with dope in cycling.

drugs are a minor problem in motorsport, a major problem in cycling.

I acutally think doping is on the wane in cycling, others disagree.

I offer as evidence though that this close to the TDF the favorite came close to changing teams to a team that is supposedly clean knowing that they would test him very rigorously.

But we only object to doping because it is cheating, right? (I am assuming this, anyway - if not, then someone please clarify.)

Therefore it is no different from corked bats, illegal bodywork, video taping opponents' practices, spiked fuel, lying to officials, bribery, or match-fixing, is it?

 

[issoisso]

Retired portuguese international player published an autobiography detailling how they avoided doping controls back when he played in the 80s, 90s and early 2000s.

*fakes surprise*