Arnout said:If you don't like doping sports, why did you take up cycling?
The fact that there is such an interest in cycling (and it is growing both in the old world and in the new world according to viewing figures) says enough about the sport.
The sport and the concept is so staggeringly good that doping is a small downside. Why care?
That's why I always defend all riders. I simply don't care about doping. Doping doesn't affect me in any way (only positive, as racing tends to become more interesting).
But please explain me, there's no way you joined cycling in a clean period as there is no such thingI tend to believe that this is the cleanest period in decades, judging by the performances, relative performances of non - dopers and by the way of racing.
sheesh - this post turned into a novel. Sorry.
I am really at a loss to understand what you are saying. I took up cycling to get fit, both physically and mentally and I have no intent of changing anything because of doping.
If the degree of corruption is less now than it has ever been, then this really is just slightly better than pro-wrestling. As far as doping goes, man-or his evolutionary ancestors- have been competing and looking for an edge over their opponents since before we left the swamps, I don't think it's ever going away. Does anyone think Usain Bolt (sic) or Michael Phelps is 100% clean?
EDIT:[/]My concern is with the institutionalizing of the corruption between the riders, team managemnt and governing authorities. Not with individual cheating. I think there are several of you mistakenly reacting to a point I am not trying to make.
I am a little surprised by your tone with me because I think we are more or less on the same page with respect to doping. It happens, just about everyone, if not actually everyone that is at the highest level has a doping or blood alteration regime in place. We may be suffering a communication breakdown. I think my original post a page or two back pretty much broke down where I stand.
When I got into cycling, all I knew was I liked it and had lost weight at it before. It's not like I thought to myself, 'Ya know, the sport hasn't been this clean in years. It's a great time to watch.' The sport has a dark side, as most do, but it seems to be dominated by its dark (corrupt) side. It's part carnival barker, part red light district, part crackhouse/shooting gallery. And unfortunately, for those uninitiated, that is all they know about it. (That and Lance if they are in N America.) Lance got me into it and it seems every Lance fan eventually has to choose between worshiping the myth ( the lie) or leaving Lance behind and becoming a fan of cycling. I picked right.
This is an aside, but: Sometimes I think a few of the people that contribute here are such hardcore cyclists that the thought of someone else participating or watching other sports is akin to being unfaithful and has no place as a fan. Or at least shouldn't be taken as seriously. I am content to not know every little nuance of each race, team or racer. I do have a life, after all. I watched from the Volta ao Algarve and P-N to the end of the TDF and just about everything in between. Then I got this new job and I have hardly been doing anything but working for over 2 months. Go look at how my post frequency died.
I am not putting the bike away. Actually I just got another one (urban commuter) but the time I have to seriously get fit is really a fraction of what it was when I first got involved. And for the record, I don't race, if I could ever get my weight to respectability, I have promised myself to enter a race, at least once. As for my own doping: I occasionally use a little creatine post ride to recover and up my power to weight ratio. We can discuss creatine in a separate thread if anyone cares to. Creatine use is terrible for typical (lightweight) cyclists, it's pretty handy when one is this heavy.
by the time i got done with this it was so long and rambling i doubt anyone wants to read it, but it took too long to just delete it.