• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Doping: the fans fault?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Apr 10, 2009
594
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
And you have wonderfully summed up why ethical behavior doesn't (can't) exist in a world governed by the logic of the markets. And it makes all the people who refuse or won't see it that way naive.

Whenever big money gets involved with anything, the first culture to be abandoned is an ethical one. Whereas nothing is pure, purity doesn't exist. Purity is for the puritans, not for those involved in big business like pro sport. It all about money, period.

Come on rhubroma, I usually agree with you in part, but just because we choose not to partake it makes us (I am lumping myself in with the puritans) and our philosophy neither nonexistent nor naive. I would argue once again that yours is an attitude that justifies actions one knows is wrong. If we (the puritans) hold to our standard we know that a) the results won't come and b) we will probably have no effect on the lack of ethics of others. We choose purity in sport anyway. And I believe some have held that standard clear to the professional ranks, you just don't hear it because of the reasons listed above.

It's a choice, period. What I see in your statement is essentially, the old standard. Everybody is doing it why can't I. It is justification.

The one thing I will agree on, the choice being made is about money.





Edit: I should say that I understand francie and your postition on the subject, I am simply saying you are dismissing purity as though it doesn't exist, and those of us that hold to it as naive, neither of which in my estimation is true.
 
slowoldman said:
Come on rhubroma, I usually agree with you in part, but just because we choose not to partake it makes us (I am lumping myself in with the puritans) and our philosophy neither nonexistent nor naive. I would argue once again that yours is an attitude that justifies actions one knows is wrong. If we (the puritans) hold to our standard we know that a) the results won't come and b) we will probably have no effect on the lack of ethics of others. We choose purity in sport anyway. And I believe some have held that standard clear to the professional ranks, you just don't hear it because of the reasons listed above.

It's a choice, period. What I see in your statement is essentially, the old standard. Everybody is doing it why can't I. It is justification.

The one thing I will agree on, the choice being made is about money.

Mine wasn't meant to justify anything or anyone. I simply wanted to point out that there is nothing ethical in big business and pro cylcing is first and foremost a big business.

If anything I wanted to throw a new concept out there, if there's anything new in such an old notion: namely that, because big business and ethics are incompatible (and primarily because of greed, pure and simple greed - for profit, for victory, for both), to expect otherwise from the pros by the fans is just naive. For that would be utopia. Now if that sounds arrogant on my part, or offends some, well it's only because I can't find another way to put it other than pure and simple naivte and puritanism and not because I wish to be arrogant or offend.

And if anybody doubts that big business and ethics are incompatable, I recommend taking another look at the stock market these days...or what's going on in the third world in terms of capitalism...

Actually it would be great for pros sports to be clean, and I don't mean to seem like I've justified doping. No, that's not what i think, but I don't think it's posssible to have dope free sport when sport is governed by the logic of the markets and given the current state of human evolution which has embraced the markets as the ideology which justifies greed and has, in the minds of some, brought history to a happy conlcusion. I don't see it that way at all...
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
slowoldman said:
Come on rhubroma, I usually agree with you in part, but just because we choose not to partake it makes us (I am lumping myself in with the puritans) and our philosophy neither nonexistent nor naive. I would argue once again that yours is an attitude that justifies actions one knows is wrong. If we (the puritans) hold to our standard we know that a) the results won't come and b) we will probably have no effect on the lack of ethics of others. We choose purity in sport anyway. And I believe some have held that standard clear to the professional ranks, you just don't hear it because of the reasons listed above.

It's a choice, period. What I see in your statement is essentially, the old standard. Everybody is doing it why can't I. It is justification.

The one thing I will agree on, the choice being made is about money.





Edit: I should say that I understand francie and your postition on the subject, I am simply saying you are dismissing purity as though it doesn't exist, and those of us that hold to it as naive, neither of which in my estimation is true.

Purity exists in cycling at the lower levels when we are riding for fun and for the spirit of competition, but hardly at the pro level, once money gets involved that's when the rule book goes out the window. For example I help train a pro rider in the offseason, I asked him if he's riding clean and he said that with the pace that the peloton is at now If he doesn't do it he's not going to keep his job, anytime a rider gets into the situation when he has to chose between doing the ethical thing or putting food on his table for the family, they are going to choose the latter.
 
Apr 10, 2009
594
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
Mine wasn't meant to justify anything or anyone. I simply wanted to point out that there is nothing ethical in big business and pro cylcing is first and foremost a big business.

If anything I wanted to throw a new concept out there, if there's anything new in such an old notion: namely that, because big business and ethics are incompatible (and primarily because of greed, pure and simple greed - for profit, for victory, for both), to expect otherwise from the pros by the fans is just naive. For that would be utopia. Now if that sounds arrogant on my part, or offends some, well it's only because I can't find another way to put it other than pure and simple naivte and puritanism and not because I wish to be arrogant or offend.

And if anybody doubts that big business and ethics are incompatable, I recommend taking another look at the stock market these days...or what's going on in the third world in terms of capitalism...

I understand your argument completely, I was just answering to what I felt was a slight to people that hope for that utopia (in sport at least). I am well aware that is what I am wishing for and that it quite frankly will probably never exist due to what you have outlined above. I just wanted to point out that naivete is not the only answer, some are well aware of their "condition":eek: or standing based on certain choices.
I think we are closer in opinion than it might appear here.
 
Apr 10, 2009
594
0
0
Visit site
franciep10 said:
Purity exists in cycling at the lower levels when we are riding for fun and for the spirit of competition, but hardly at the pro level, once money gets involved that's when the rule book goes out the window. For example I help train a rider for Milram in the offseason, I asked him if he's riding clean and he said that with the pace that the peloton is at now If he doesn't do it he's not going to keep his job, anytime a rider gets into the situation when he has to chose between doing the ethical thing or putting food on his table for the family, they are going to choose the latter.

francie, I completely understand what you are saying. As I said before, I think if we were all face to face this conversation would head in a different direction. I am not as puritanical as I may appear here (except in sport, it is a fault of mine;)). I feel for guys like the one you mention, I wouldn't want to have to make that choice. I will always argue for my utopian view of sport though. I still argue it is a choice, and not an easy one I am sure. As I have said before, as a masters rider in So Cal, I am amazed and you may be too (although maybe not) at the number of riders that are suspect in the amateur ranks.
 
slowoldman said:
I understand your argument completely, I was just answering to what I felt was a slight to people that hope for that utopia (in sport at least). I am well aware that is what I am wishing for and that it quite frankly will probably never exist due to what you have outlined above. I just wanted to point out that naivete is not the only answer, some are well aware of their "condition":eek: or standing based on certain choices.
I think we are closer in opinion than it might appear here.

Agreed and I want to reiterate that in citing people as "naive" and/or "puritanical," was merely meant as a critical analysis of a certain segment of society, which does exist (and in terms of the market logic and big business in great numbers it seems to me), and not as an insult at least as directed to anyone on this site. Because frankly at times I find that certain segment of society in the least tiresome, at the most downright angering, because they are the ones, in being hoodwinked and buying into the corporate propaganda, who indirectly allow the unethical and hypocritical business culture to thrive. They are ironically the ones who save the ill doers (as in sport), when not actual criminals (as in Wall Street), from being held accountable for their misdeads. Because they either can't handle the truth, or find it convenient to deny it's existence.

Until their mentality changes, we in the minority will always be demonized, as happend to any revolutionary spirt by those in power, and branded as radicals. So instead of feeling upset with the nature of this social relationship, whenever a puritan has found my views to be rediculous, I just remind myself that thiers are pathetic and giftgiving to those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo because to effect change would mean a loss in power and/or extreme wealth. cool:
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
slowoldman said:
francie, I completely understand what you are saying. As I said before, I think if we were all face to face this conversation would head in a different direction. I am not as puritanical as I may appear here (except in sport, it is a fault of mine;)). I feel for guys like the one you mention, I wouldn't want to have to make that choice. I will always argue for my utopian view of sport though. I still argue it is a choice, and not an easy one I am sure. As I have said before, as a masters rider in So Cal, I am amazed and you may be too (although maybe not) at the number of riders that are suspect in the amateur ranks.

Actually I'm not shocked by this at all a lot of amateurs are doping now so they can get into pro cycling, what happens though is that when they get into the pro's they are overmatched, and I understand what you are saying, I want this sport to be clean, I train really talented riders one of my riders has an undoped VO2 max of 86 and a 6.6 power to weight ratio, and he can't make it to the pro's that's bull **** but that's how it is, I wish it were better but maybe that utopia can happen in the future.
 
Cheating in sport will always exist, and always has. It's an undeniable fact of competitive human nature. Condoning or condemning are pointless exercises and political in nature. The choices are basic.

Test stringently and expose more athletes, which propagates the myth that a particular sport is in a doping crisis (UCI). Or test very little, catching very few, and enjoy great popularity and happy fans (FIFA).

The intensity of the competition, and hence the problem increases correspondingly with the popularity of the sport. It may be putting the cart before the horse to say that the fan is responsible, but we are certainly a contributing factor.
 
May 20, 2009
27
0
0
Visit site
VeloFidelis said:
Cheating in sport will always exist, and always has. It's an undeniable fact of competitive human nature. Condoning or condemning are pointless exercises and political in nature. The choices are basic.

Test stringently and expose more athletes, which propagates the myth that a particular sport is in a doping crisis (UCI). Or test very little, catching very few, and enjoy great popularity and happy fans (FIFA).

As a fan I'm of the opinion that the anti-doping efforts hurt the entertainment value of the sport. I'm talking about the highest level pro peleton. I enjoy watching climbers with crits in high 50s rip up the mountains. My recommendation for UCI and the major races is provide free 'products' and proper medical assistance for safe use.
 
Apr 12, 2009
1,087
2
0
Visit site
longrun said:
As a fan I'm of the opinion that the anti-doping efforts hurt the entertainment value of the sport. I'm talking about the highest level pro peleton. I enjoy watching climbers with crits in high 50s rip up the mountains. My recommendation for UCI and the major races is provide free 'products' and proper medical assistance for safe use.

True let every one be doped up so we have the reputation of pro wrestling:rolleyes:
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
longrun said:
As a fan I'm of the opinion that the anti-doping efforts hurt the entertainment value of the sport. I'm talking about the highest level pro peleton. I enjoy watching climbers with crits in high 50s rip up the mountains. My recommendation for UCI and the major races is provide free 'products' and proper medical assistance for safe use.

Actually thats a good idea.

I would like all anti-doping thrown out and then people can see what happens. Why protect people from themselves eh? Once a doper, always a doper anyways. If somebody has raced before JACKED with even a 50% crit why would they want to go back to being clean? They dont! And anyways, you can dope safely and very very effectively if you know what your are doing. And if kids die, eh thats the sport for you, PRO sport eh he he he he.

Pro sport is a bad concept, at the very least it reflects our broken values as a society (100% money, material items and sex.) Not to mention everybody's in a huge rush!
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
franciep10 said:
Well why do we watch pro cycling to see the pro's climb, sprint and time trial like most of you guys can only hope to do, would you want to watch something for three weeks, where riders are going up a hill at the same speed as you would, no we wouldn't while I agree Hein is an idiot and doping is not the fan's fault we do have something to do with it, because simply it wouldn't make great tv.

Okay I'll only say this:

Verbruggen talks about the Tour raced at 25 km/hr.... ???? I could average that on my 12 year old nephew's pink Magna from Wall mart. LOL
 
May 20, 2009
27
0
0
Visit site
If he is saying race the tour at 25km/hr, that's another symptom we're in a period of anti-doping hysteria.

Best thing cycling could do is drop out of the Olympics. Tennis ought to do the same thing. Then WADA is out taken out of the loop. Neither sport needs the IOC. They're not like swimming which is totally dependent on the Olympics for any media exposure. The riders and tennis players would love it, no more daily 60 minute window for OOC testing. Ridiculous for professional entertainers.
 
BigBoat said:
Actually thats a good idea.

I would like all anti-doping thrown out and then people can see what happens. Why protect people from themselves eh? Once a doper, always a doper anyways. If somebody has raced before JACKED with even a 50% crit why would they want to go back to being clean? They dont! And anyways, you can dope safely and very very effectively if you know what your are doing. And if kids die, eh thats the sport for you, PRO sport eh he he he he.

Pro sport is a bad concept, at the very least it reflects our broken values as a society (100% money, material items and sex.) Not to mention everybody's in a huge rush!

Now that's an honest assessment. Especially about pro sport being a "bad concept." For it is the maximum expression of our agonistic society, like a metaphor for conquest through war, but also the win all or loose all mentality which governs our capitalism and the financial markets. Pure excess. And as they say about war (and love), there are no rules in it. We do not teach our children healthy values through such an agonistic culture. To the contrary, we teach them that only the strong go forward, whereas the weak are to be crushed. It is inherent in the nature of sport, which doesn't promote mutual respect and honor among the various elements in our society, but tyranny, excessive practice, Machiavelianism.

Yet we as a human society, and especially in the Western World with its roots in classical civilization of the Olympic games and amphetheater spectacles and then colonialism and now corporate capitalism, are condemned to find in sport every so called virtuous action. Virtue is the victor who becomes a role model in our society for the more sensational ways he has vanquished his oponents. Naturally this flies directly against the West's democratic and religious sentiments, which teach that all men were created equal and are equally blessed before the eyes of the divinity. So what is preached from the political stage and pulpit, is posed in direct oposition to the agonistic mentality which really governs the collective psyche.

Or, perhaps I've just blatterd a bunch of bull.....:rolleyes:
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
Good points Rhumbroma.

I certainly agree with free market system.... But the values society puts forth.... What is the obsession people have (KIDS) with, fancy:)) :) ) spinner rims, gangster rap, big money and sex all about? Society is SICK! Anti-doping and the "war on drugs" is virtually thin air. Except for a few unlucky dopes, most everybody skates.

Cycling like all pro sports and ESPECIALLY olympic sports, is a freak show, Lance is a doped circus freak. Its sick but its what people want. If he hadnt of doped he never would have finished the Tour ever. Maybe not even gotten to ride in major european races due to his highest undoped natural V02 max being barely 80. Thats virtually F-all in the freaky realm of talented pros....

Lance clean would not have been the FREAK he was for everybody to crowd around and watch... Not even a great rider according to everybody on this forum... Lances natural undoped talent is below the prospects we talk about on the other thread! people want to see a freak: Better VID!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NSSLFCEFOIw&feature=related
 
Jun 3, 2009
287
0
0
Visit site
rhubroma said:
... "naive" and/or "puritanical," .... Because frankly at times I find that certain segment of society in the least tiresome, at the most downright angering, because they are the ones, in being hoodwinked and buying into the corporate propaganda, who indirectly allow the unethical and hypocritical business culture to thrive. They are ironically the ones who save the ill doers (as in sport), when not actual criminals (as in Wall Street), from being held accountable for their misdeads. Because they either can't handle the truth, or find it convenient to deny it's existence.

Great point but perhaps many of those people have just never really properly thought about it.
 
tifosa said:
Is doping the fans fault? According to Verbruggen, it is.

http://www.rue89.com/2009/06/03/argent-et-politique-les-vraies-raisons-du-retour-darmstrong

Armstrong's motive for a comeback? Money and politics of course.

Yes, all this and more from the Ballester & Walsh book: The Dirty Tour

Sorry to say I'm more of a summer fiction type reader...

Sorry if this looks like spam, but I can't help respond to your posting with a suggestion you snag a copy of my newest novel about a doping scandal in the Tour de France, "Feast Days of the Saints" Truth is stranger than fiction, but fiction is a lot more fun. It is being released the same week the Tour stars in July.
 
shawnrohrbach said:
Sorry if this looks like spam, but I can't help respond to your posting with a suggestion you snag a copy of my newest novel about a doping scandal in the Tour de France, "Feast Days of the Saints" Truth is stranger than fiction, but fiction is a lot more fun. It is being released the same week the Tour stars in July.

Does it include a thinly veiled character based on Armstrong who is exposed as a fraud? Or is it your usual outrage that someone like Armstrong could be accused of doing the obvious? The one thing a novel needs is the ring of truth, and you have demonstrated here that you do not have a grasp of reality when it comes to doping in cycling. I really do not see how you could write anything but tripe. It would be like a creationist writing a novel that involves evolution.