At what point do you walk away?

[Roland Rat]

In the Real Peloton Clentador special, Ned Boulting was alluding to his disillusionment with pro cycling and that he's wondering where we go from here. I've already walked away from pro cycling once, at the height of mid-90's EPO culture, and despite all the promises we're no further on. We have had 7 straight victories for doping, followed by a TDF where the winner was disqualified, the Puerto investigation and cover-up, the Astana transfusion kits that seem to have vanished, a huge ongoing investigation encompassing the UCI with clear evidence of corruption and despite that investigation, they are still trying to get away with it.

Personally, were Armstrong to fail to be convicted, Bruyneel fail to be sanctioned in any way and the UCI to remain in place exactly as they are, I would be very close to walking away again. And as a Brit, should Thomas or Kennaugh test positive, then that could do it also. Of course, I would still ride and race, but just ignore the pro scene. What will make you say "f*** it, I can't be bothered"?

 

[Lanark]

I will stop watching when races get too boring. No doping scandals will make me stop watching, that's just part of the game.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I still enjoy watching the sport, regardless of the scandals. However, I have no illusions about what I am seeing. I do root for some of the riders that I truly believe are clean (Voeckler, for example).

I don't really have a lot of respect for the vast majority of pro cyclists in general though. I'm not going to ask any of these people for their autographs. I understand how much suffering is a part of cycling, but the fact that so many of these guys dope and lie about it somehow cheapens their effort, in my estimation.

 

[ultimobici]

I don't think I could walk away unless I was physically unable to ride.

I got into cycling proper as a 16 year old, but didn't discover racing and the European scene until a year or so later. It took me 15 years before I actually rode the same roads that the Pros ride in Lombardia, and i realised just how hard it must be.

It's not that I don't care, rather that there is far too much heritage in this sport for me to just let go.

That said, I want to see the current sport cleaned up and set to continue. The only way I can see that happening is wholesale change, with McQuaid etc gone.

 

[Anonymous]

I think if i was going to walk away, I would have done already. I genuinly think things are improving, however I think if the current UCI were scrapped, and 2 or 3 Team Managers banned from the sport I think things would get better a whole lot quicker.

I think weve been through the worst, the period in the late nineties onwards. Its like a natural curve. Ten years ago, every doping positive seemed to be a step in the WRONG direction, today, every doping positive seams to be in the RIGHT direction.

The reason Im optimistic is the growth of technology, the internet etc. 20 years ago it was easy to uphold the Omerta, fans only understanding of cycling was what was censored via the tv or the press, many fans didnt really understand what went on, and when there were occasional doping cases we thought that one rider was a cheat and the rest were ok. Thats different now, more and more people know what goes on, everything is analysed etc. But more importantly, there are a generation of cyclists coming into the sport now who have grown up in that age, who arent coming into cycling thinking its all clean and cosy and when given some drugs to take think its just the way. The younger riders coming into the sport now are coming in with their eyes wide open, there will still be those that cheat, but its going to decrease. More riders are aware of fans feelings about doping and what we want from the sport. Again there will always be riders who dont give a **** what the fans think, and will dope anyway.

For me, the time I will maybe give up on the sport is when these kids start testing positive. Im optimistic that the new generation of cyclists are going to try and do it clean/er. When porte, and kennaugh, Phinney etc start failing tests then I think the future of the sport really is ****ed

 

[flicker]

Money, sports and doping, a happy troika. Why walk away now when the fun has only yet begun....

 

[Willy_Voet]

I like the drama, the speculation. It's like a daytime TV drama that amuses me during breaks at work. I don't think I'll ever walk away.

That said, I stopped buying videos and team jerseys a long time ago. I feel no loyalty to riders/teams anymore and don't feel like reliving any of the phony victories.

Were cycling to clean up its act, I guess I could cheer for my favorite again.

 

[scribe]

I stopped after Landis was popped. He seriously made me want to leave again of late, because I don't find his reasoning of 'outing' American cycling to be useful to me as a spectator.

Contador riding without getting popped will make me want to quit again. This talk of a 3 month suspension during what amounts to the off season to be a serious offense to me as an enthusiast.

 

[flicker]

My faith will return when the Olympics become a fair, clean, non political athletic competition. As far as now, no convictions or sanctions will do a clean up of cycling. The doping is to deeply engrained in the culture of cycling. Cycling just takes the bad rap by reputation and its transparent doping culture.
I will enjoy cycling as a cynic and try not to point fingers. I will enjoy the spectacle and drama.

 

[andy1234]

I would no more walk away from watching pro racing for the doping than walk away from watching the Stones because Keith Richards enjoys a pill or two.

Its not a show of who is the finest physical specimen or even who the best cyclist is, it a spectacle, entertainment and an advertising bandwagon.

The Olympic ideal has never been the raison d'etre in the pro peloton and it never will be.

 

[junkie]

I can't see how any of you(us) people who truly addicted to cycling quit watching pros just because of such an insignificant issue as yet another doping case.

 

[BikeCentric]

I stopped after Landis was popped. He seriously made me want to leave again of late, because I don't find his reasoning of 'outing' American cycling to be useful to me as a spectator.

Contador riding without getting popped will make me want to quit again. This talk of a 3 month suspension during what amounts to the off season to be a serious offense to me as an enthusiast.

Landis getting popped after Puerto on the eve of that '06 Tour DQ'ing a bunch of top favorites is what disgusted me enough to walk away for a few years.

It seems I came back to following the sport at a pretty bad time what with a certain rider from Texas also coming back. The whole war of words with Contador at the Tour last year really disgusted me and of course the continuing stream of positives from many riders showed me nothing was changing.

Now this year the Landis affair is kind of disgusting me as well and it doesn't at this point look like it's going to cause any positive change. Contador testing positive certainly doesn't surprise me but it's again terrible for the sport when the dominant rider is popped. I'm pretty much done with following the pro version of the sport at this time.

I won't stop riding my bike ever though, and I'm still racing. Don't think I'll ever have the same enthusiasm I once did for making racing like a part-time job though. That's pretty sad but the truth is following pro racing these days just makes me feel crappy about the sport and if anything takes away motivation from my own riding and racing.

 

[BikeCentric]

I can't see how any of you(us) people who truly addicted to cycling quit watching pros just because of such an insignificant issue as yet another doping case.

That would simply be because you do not understand just how significant doping in this sport truly is. And yes, on a relative basis doping wrecks cycling more than most other sports. A doper is faster than a clean rider, cut and dried.

 

[hfer07]

TBH I walked away years ago (beginnings of 90's) as fan with blinded faith on riders-after that point-I have enjoyed the sport just for the spectacle, nothing less nothing more -- the classics, the giro & one week races are still dear to me, but the Tour de France has broken my heart with all the doping cases & the nonsense...

 

[VeloFidelis]

If you are a fan of professional cycling, regardless of how long, you have never seen clean racing. So why would you consider walking away? If you think that you are witnessing something unique that is taking over the sport, then you are working from a naive position, and need to gain a greater perspective.

We all want to see racing at the highest level, but seem to live in denial about what we are actually watching. If professional racing were to somehow magically "get clean" it would probably be as exciting as watching paint dry.

I am not an advocate for doping, but I refuse to be deluded by the day dream that it will ever be different than it has always been. It is a beautiful sport. But make no mistake, at the highest levels, you are watching a battle between genetic mutants who will avail themselves of whatever small advantage they can get away with. And that makes cycling just like every other professional sport.

Choose to be a fan, or choose not to be. But don't fool yourselves about what you are watching

 

[roundabout]

Now. This sport doesn't deserve any effort to make it cleaner.

 

[erader]

you'll either come to a point where you can no longer handle the truth -- i.e. "they all dope" -- or else you learn to accept doping as another discipline of the sport like time trialling or climbing.

erader

 

[sometriguy]

I personally enjoy the drama of the doping scandals, although I would prefer they were clean.

The racing is so much fun, there is no way to stop watching.

What disappoints me is the disparity in who gets caught and who doesn't get caught. I think it is easier to swallow the doping scandals when you have an online forum like this and can speak to others who understand what is happening in the sport.

I go mad when a bunch of American fanboys laugh in my face everytime anyone goes down, then tells me how lance never tested positive.

Having a place to vent frustration and to also enjoy the soap opera, makes for an appealing fan experience.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I would no more walk away from watching pro racing for the doping than walk away from watching the Stones because Keith Richards enjoys a pill or two.

Its not a show of who is the finest physical specimen or even who the best cyclist is, it a spectacle, entertainment and an advertising bandwagon.

The Olympic ideal has never been the raison d'etre in the pro peloton and it never will be.

While you are right - isn't this the point though - it IS meant to be a sport, not shaggin X-factor.

This is what pee's me off - cycling is a magnificent sport and yet its credibility is gone because of the doping and the constant bungling by the relevant authorities.

To the OP- meh, I don't follow it (the Pro side) with any real enthusiasm anymore. I caught the last 3 laps of the WC yesterday, where before I would have been counting the hours down and had all my stats and predictions done.

If I want to see proper exciting quality racing I watch juniors race.

 

[whittnj]

A Rat Attack

In the Real Peloton Clentador special, Ned Boulting was alluding to his disillusionment with pro cycling and that he's wondering where we go from here. I've already walked away from pro cycling once, at the height of mid-90's EPO culture, and despite all the promises we're no further on. We have had 7 straight victories for doping, followed by a TDF where the winner was disqualified, the Puerto investigation and cover-up, the Astana transfusion kits that seem to have vanished, a huge ongoing investigation encompassing the UCI with clear evidence of corruption and despite that investigation, they are still trying to get away with it.

Personally, were Armstrong to fail to be convicted, Bruyneel fail to be sanctioned in any way and the UCI to remain in place exactly as they are, I would be very close to walking away again. And as a Brit, should Thomas or Kennaugh test positive, then that could do it also. Of course, I would still ride and race, but just ignore the pro scene. What will make you say "f*** it, I can't be bothered"?

Almost exactly what you wrote!!
Many years ago I was at the top of my amatuer group and was offered a European contract, that was when I was offered all sorts of products. I refused and soon tired of battling to win races and left the sport. I started 10 years later and soon began to find form, only to find that we as a sport had gotten worse, After 20 years of involvement in cycle racing I now only ride for enjoyment. So I said "f...it"! I watch all the classics and tours every year in hope that one day the UCI and the team managers will wake up.

 

[Anonymous]

If you are a fan of professional cycling, regardless of how long, you have never seen clean racing. So why would you consider walking away? If you think that you are witnessing something unique that is taking over the sport, then you are working from a naive position, and need to gain a greater perspective.

We all want to see racing at the highest level, but seem to live in denial about what we are actually watching. If professional racing were to somehow magically "get clean" it would probably be as exciting as watching paint dry.

I am not an advocate for doping, but I refuse to be deluded by the day dream that it will ever be different than it has always been. It is a beautiful sport. But make no mistake, at the highest levels, you are watching a battle between genetic mutants who will avail themselves of whatever small advantage they can get away with. And that makes cycling just like every other professional sport.

Choose to be a fan, or choose not to be. But don't fool yourselves about what you are watching

+1

Once you lose your virginity (so to speak) it really comes down to this.

 

[paperbackwriter]

Sorry for the OT, but the Stones argument is what I've been thinking about too. People seem to have no problem with accepting 'equivalents' of doping in other spheres of life. Music is a good example- I've spent a huge part of my life listening to it, reading about it and discussing it, going to gigs and festivals. All time greats used drugs and sometimes were openly excited about how it helps them with their music. Contemporary artists who I like, some of them who I've talked to, are just the same. But it does sound a bit silly- and I've never heard about anyone doing it- to dislike any of them because of it all or to complain that, for example, drugs gave McCartney, Lennon or Brian Wilson unfair advantage over his contemporaries. I guess it even tends to be seen the other way, I remember someone saying- "Wow, how cool this Talking Heads album is, you can feel every line of coke Byrne sniffed".
Or take literature. In this case, people sometimes see taking drugs as disqualifying, but they're the ones who usually aren't really interested and only want to show they heard about a writer someone else mentions. No one serious would say that he hates Proust because he was such a junkie.
Even in everyday life. I'm at Uni at the moment, there're quite a few people around who when exams time comes, help themselves with different kinds of pills and whether it's a placebo effect or not, actually do better thanks to it. I don't think it ever occured anyone who's just on coffee that he's being cheated.
Where's the difference? Maybe not between passing the exam with good result and winning Tour de France, but between the latter one and writing a book that is considered one of the greatest of all times or writing a song that earns someone millions?

Back to the topic, there's one thing that would make me walk away (from following pro cycling, not riding myself, of course)- if the majority of riders I like tested positive in short period of time and were banned. Only because watching would become boring then.

 

[VeloFidelis]

While you are right - isn't this the point though - it IS meant to be a sport, not shaggin X-factor.

This is what pee's me off - cycling is a magnificent sport and yet its credibility is gone because of the doping and the constant bungling by the relevant authorities.

To the OP- meh, I don't follow it (the Pro side) with any real enthusiasm anymore. I caught the last 3 laps of the WC yesterday, where before I would have been counting the hours down and had all my stats and predictions done.

If I want to see proper exciting quality racing I watch juniors race.

Here lies the conundrum of doping in cycling. The vociferous and righteous advocates of clean cycling believe that they are doing cycling, themselves, and the rest of us, a great service by protesting to the highest levels and demanding retribution against those accused offenders. Are they helping the "sport" of cycling? Or are they tearing it down?

Cycling is perceived by even the neophyte as a dope riddled sport. Is it any worse than other professional sports? Certainly American Football is far worse in terms of participation and long term debilitating affects. Operation Puerto netted over 200 professional athletes of which 54 were cyclist. What is the punitive impact on the other 146 footballers, tennis pros, and track and field athletes?

It would seem that their fans don't really care about the implications, and ironically their sports suffer far less from doping scandals. Maybe those fans are just blissfully ignorant... or maybe they have a much better understanding of what they are actually witnessing and make an actual choice about expressing indignant outrage. In either case both they, and their sports seem to come out ahead.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Sorry for the OT, but the Stones argument is what I've been thinking about too. People seem to have no problem with accepting 'equivalents' of doping in other spheres of life. Music is a good example- I've spent a huge part of my life listening to it, reading about it and discussing it, going to gigs and festivals. All time greats used drugs and sometimes were openly excited about how it helps them with their music. Contemporary artists who I like, some of them who I've talked to, are just the same. But it does sound a bit silly- and I've never heard about anyone doing it- to dislike any of them because of it all or to complain that, for example, drugs gave McCartney, Lennon or Brian Wilson unfair advantage over his contemporaries. I guess it even tends to be seen the other way, I remember someone saying- "Wow, how cool this Talking Heads album is, you can feel every line of coke Byrne sniffed".
Or take literature. In this case, people sometimes see taking drugs as disqualifying, but they're the ones who usually aren't really interested and only want to show they heard about a writer someone else mentions. No one serious would say that he hates Proust because he was such a junkie.
Even in everyday life. I'm at Uni at the moment, there're quite a few people around who when exams time comes, help themselves with different kinds of pills and whether it's a placebo effect or not, actually do better thanks to it. I don't think it ever occured anyone who's just on coffee that he's being cheated.
Where's the difference? Maybe not between passing the exam with good result and winning Tour de France, but between the latter one and writing a book that is considered one of the greatest of all times or writing a song that earns someone millions?

Back to the topic, there's one thing that would make me walk away (from following pro cycling, not riding myself, of course)- if the majority of riders I like tested positive in short period of time and were banned. Only because watching would become boring then.

The difference is one is a 'recreational drug', usually taken for sh*ts and giggles - the other is a Performance Enhancing Drug, taken to enhance performance in sport that gives a distinct advantage over those who do not wish to do so.

 

[ultimobici]

If I were to turn my back on cycling I would have to turn my back on all sports.

Cycling is no dirtier than any other sport out there. The difference is that the sport's organisers are less effective at keeping a lid on it.

Football, tennis, cricket, rugby, golf etc all have cheating, but their governing bodies are far better able to and willing to stop it being leaked out.

In 2006 while OP was spilling out into the media, which sport was pursued in the press and vilified? Cycling. As soon as football was mentioned the brakes were put on. At the same time the World Cup was on, FIFA's own backslapping report makes for interesting reading. Urine & blood testing was carried out but no record can be found of how many actual blood tests were done. If we look at the 2010 figures of 552 tests, 512 can be accounted for as the regular urine tests in training, friendlies & matches all through the competition, leaving 40 possible blood tests. According to FIFA that's double the 2006 level of testing. Also according to their own report on the 2006 WC blood tests were considered ineffective in detection over urine tests in 2006 so were dispensed with! That leaves a bare 260 odd tests in 2006 out of 500+ players in 64 matches over three weeks with no announced positives. Contrast that with the Tour. Similar time scale, 149 riders, 21 stages. On each stage the Yellow, Green White & Polka Dot jersey holders are tested along with the stage winner and another random rider. So 5 tests per day gives us 105 tests. No wonder Football had no positives to report!

http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/newsid=1280619/index.html
http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/federation/news/newsid=585014.html