Evans...

[Ninety5rpm]

Cheating = the breaking of rules.

The rules of this game/sport are being broken by people playing the game.

Everyone has the choice to break rules, whatever the environment. They do so at their peril.

In this case they loose privilege of being invited to participate in this game.

That is their choice, they can take their bat and ball (or bike) home and play in their own backyard with their backyard rules.

Which rules? The official rules... yes. The rules actually generally followed by almost all the riders... not so sure those are being broken by those who dope.

Who follows allof the "official rules"? Nobody. So by that definition everyone is a cheat, and that's not a very useful definition. I think we have to go with the rules that are actually followed by most of the riders - and, like it or not, that includes "anything goes in terms of doping as long as you test clean".

For example, is it cheating to collect the money in the middle of the Monopoly board when you land on Free Parking? Yes, it is cheating, if you're playing by the official rules (which state all taxes, fines, etc. get paid to the bank, not put in the middle of the board, and there is nothing about "free parking" in the rules which says landing there means pick up money in the middle of the board). Of course, most players implicitly agree to modify the rules with respect to Free Parking. I don't know, maybe they even do it in official Monopoly tournaments (do they still have those?).

Whether doping is "cheating" is not that clear.

 

[ambrose]

I think the problem with this thread and forum is that people (mainly big boat) are pulling conclusion from some dodgy hypothesis, with s**t all evidence. This is why people get so annoyed and respond. if you are going to accuse someone, or everyone, of doping, then have some real evidence not just speculation that he met someone who met someone else who went to school with someone else. this isn't proof. don't make claims which you can't back up with proof. Did you never complete basic high school science praticals? Just because you can't ride the tour clean, doesn't mean that no one else can, you are forgeting that these aren't anybodies pulled from the street, put on a fancy bike and told to ride around france for few weeks.

Remeber it is easy to point your finger at someone, but unless you have the proof to back it up your are talking s**t, and your opinion is worthless. the burden of proof lies with you.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I think the problem with this thread and forum is that people (mainly big boat) are pulling conclusion from some dodgy hypothesis, with s**t all evidence. This is why people get so annoyed and respond. if you are going to accuse someone, or everyone, of doping, then have some real evidence not just speculation that he met someone who met someone else who went to school with someone else. this isn't proof. don't make claims which you can't back up with proof. Did you never complete basic high school science praticals? Just because you can't ride the tour clean, doesn't mean that no one else can, you are forgeting that these aren't anybodies pulled from the street, put on a fancy bike and told to ride around france for few weeks.

Remeber it is easy to point your finger at someone, but unless you have the proof to back it up your are talking s**t, and your opinion is worthless. the burden of proof lies with you.

If his (bigboat) evidence had some credibility then i wouldn't be so harsh but you can't accuse people out of jack all evidence.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I must admit I do find some of BB's posts very informative - although I do tend to ignore the 'all jacked up' bit.
His is an opinion - and I try and seek out some balance.

Here is an article from someone who has just left the Pro peloton and even worked with some of the more interesting teams.

http://nyvelocity.com/content/interviews/2009/inigo-san-millan

Just another point of view....

 

[boalio]

I actually agree with you. I wish their were more threads about the racing and not about stupid doping conspiracies with little or no proof at all. Cycling news needs to moderate the amount of stupid threads on the site.

it takes two people two argue...

 

[auscyclefan94]

it takes two people two argue...

What's that suppose to mean?

 

[msjett]

What's that suppose to mean?

I thought it was quite obvious......you keep taking the bait.....but you aren't alone....hence....this thread went from a few posts to pages of arguments for and against.

 

[Captain Kirk]

Whether doping is "cheating" is not that clear.

These facts are self evident:

You take part in this game
You agree to the rules
You get caught
You get banned

Logically the players agree with this, as when those who are caught are banned and no longer take part.

Those who do cheat, and will not admit to it, are too logically proving it is against the rules through their silence and so CHEATING.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

That depends on how you define "cheating"..,

I don't always agree with you, but I have to say I think you are correct here.

Doping sucks. It sucks that it's at the level it is, and it gives the gains it does (meaning, it's very difficult to not dope and survive the sport). But when you pull the curtain back and look at everything that's Oz, what you say is indeed how the world of cycling (most sports) works.

For those that want to sit back and take pot shots at BigB, I suggest you sift through his many other posts. Yeah, a lot of it is hot talk, but he lets on every so often some quite pertinent and compelling info.

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

For what its worth, I believe Evans is a clean rider...I always have. He is probably the only GC rider who would really surprise me if he tested non negative!! That being said...auscyclefan94...you have a bad habit of "hating" anyone who does not agree with your opinion. That is pretty lame!! Let me get this out of the way first...I surely already dislike your style..so I'm sure that when I post an opinion that you don't agree with I will be expecting you to hate my kind. Whew, I'm glad I got that out of the way!! Bring on the Tour.

thats true, i was merely stating my opinion in the "dekker positive" thread, and suddenly i had auscycle hate on my end lol, i think he lacks a bit of maturity/sense? Personal attacks are stupid, forum = place to state your opinion, nothing more.

On topic.. I don't like cadel, but being an optimist i like to think he is clean, and that the claims that everyone dopes is untrue. but who knows.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I thought it was quite obvious......you keep taking the bait.....but you aren't alone....hence....this thread went from a few posts to pages of arguments for and against.

Isn't the point of a forum is to give your point of view + argue with others. I am not going to talk to 'you know who' anymore. it's not worth it

 

[msjett]

Isn't the point of a forum is to give your point of view + argue with others. I am not going to talk to 'you know who' anymore. it's not worth it

It is indeed the point of the forum...but you got to know when to pick your battles...

 

[auscyclefan94]

It is indeed the point of the forum...but you got to know when to pick your battles...

thanks for your advice, do you think mick rogers will do much at the tour? Personally i don't think he can top 10 at all due to not being strong enough in the big mountains and that he is not a great grand tour time trialist.

 

[msjett]

thanks for your advice, do you think mick rogers will do much at the tour? Personally i don't think he can top 10 at all due to not being strong enough in the big mountains and that he is not a great grand tour time trialist.

I think Rogers is a dark horse for this tour...I wouldn't discount him until we get to the mountains and see how he performs, he can time trial, and well Columbia has the goods for the TTT. This is also the guy who was only stopped from being in Yellow by a broken collarbone....so he has potential, my concern is his health, it has taken him so long to recover from his illness.


Nothing would please me more than two Aussie riders upon the podium in Paris giving the two finger salute to all those who said they would never win....a girl can dream can't she! lol

 

[benpounder]

I am not going to defend BigBoat per se. I will say that he is a bit more honest than a number of other commentors. Every few years some new 'hero cyclist' arrises and garners much adulation from cycling fans. Chances are that that revered rider will test positive, be accused of doping by a source considered by any of the legal authorities, or be closely linked to a rider/doctor/clinic that is under investigation: Kohl, Ricco, Landis, Valverde, Contador, Basso... Yet every year those of us active in the various cycling forums have seen the infatuated fan laud 'their' guy as the only one that really seems to be clean.

I know, I did it with both Hamilton and Landis.

But over time, an honest fan will recognize that their guy is just as succeptible to the temptations as the next to buy a precious few seconds. It is not necessarily a condemnation of the particular cyclist, rather an indictment of the entire cycling body. As anectdote, a number of years ago there was an interview with several NBA referees. It it they admited that there existed a tacit agreement between the NBA, the owners association, and the players union, that they should not foul out the star players, even when said star player was consistently committing fouls that other, lesser, players were being charged with. As with cycling, if a sport can not generate interest, it can not earn money. The riders are just playing their part, to be held liable for their flagrant violations to be sure, but not the evil culprit that the neophyte has been led to believe.

But to come to this conclusion, one has to be honest with oneself. Hero worship is dangerous on a number or front, but it's most blatant pitfall is it blinds us to faults and precludes honest and realistic evaluations. This becomes particularly apparent when one encounters another offering a caustic opinion of our hero. Instead of listening, one lashes out in rhetorical fury, protective of, and defensive for our hero.

Now you may think BigBoat is attacking your hero, but he really isnt. He is attacking the status quo of cycling that sets forth rules that allow doping, as long as certain lines are not crossed. And I think everyone here would concur that those lines are not just way too lenient, but way too fuzzy as well. Basso, Ricco, and Vino got busted and they are, or will soon be back in the pro pelaton - Heras, Kohl, and Ullrich got busted and are gone.

The question is, therefore, will we allow ourselves to be blinded by temporary devotion to a particular rider at the expense of the lasting integrity of our beloved sport.

Personally, I think Levi is a clean rider, I also think Cadel is clean, and Sastre as well. But with so many of their collegues proven, or implicated in doping schemes, there is no way in hell that I'd argue that they are indisputably clean. Statistically speaking, the odds are against them being clean.

 

[auscyclefan94]

I am not going to defend BigBoat per se. I will say that he is a bit more honest than a number of other commentors. Every few years some new 'hero cyclist' arrises and garners much adulation from cycling fans. Chances are that that revered rider will test positive, be accused of doping by a source considered by any of the legal authorities, or be closely linked to a rider/doctor/clinic that is under investigation: Kohl, Ricco, Landis, Valverde, Contador, Basso... Yet every year those of us active in the various cycling forums have seen the infatuated fan laud 'their' guy as the only one that really seems to be clean.

I know, I did it with both Hamilton and Landis.

But over time, an honest fan will recognize that their guy is just as succeptible to the temptations as the next to buy a precious few seconds. It is not necessarily a condemnation of the particular cyclist, rather an indictment of the entire cycling body. As anectdote, a number of years ago there was an interview with several NBA referees. It it they admited that there existed a tacit agreement between the NBA, the owners association, and the players union, that they should not foul out the star players, even when said star player was consistently committing fouls that other, lesser, players were being charged with. As with cycling, if a sport can not generate interest, it can not earn money. The riders are just playing their part, to be held liable for their flagrant violations to be sure, but not the evil culprit that the neophyte has been led to believe.

But to come to this conclusion, one has to be honest with oneself. Hero worship is dangerous on a number or front, but it's most blatant pitfall is it blinds us to faults and precludes honest and realistic evaluations. This becomes particularly apparent when one encounters another offering a caustic opinion of our hero. Instead of listening, one lashes out in rhetorical fury, protective of, and defensive for our hero.

Now you may think BigBoat is attacking your hero, but he really isnt. He is attacking the status quo of cycling that sets forth rules that allow doping, as long as certain lines are not crossed. And I think everyone here would concur that those lines are not just way too lenient, but way too fuzzy as well. Basso, Ricco, and Vino got busted and they are, or will soon be back in the pro pelaton - Heras, Kohl, and Ullrich got busted and are gone.

The question is, therefore, will we allow ourselves to be blinded by temporary devotion to a particular rider at the expense of the lasting integrity of our beloved sport.

Personally, I think Levi is a clean rider, I also think Cadel is clean, and Sastre as well. But with so many of their collegues proven, or implicated in doping schemes, there is no way in hell that I'd argue that they are indisputably clean. Statistically speaking, the odds are against them being clean.

Unfortunately, because of the many controvrsies and the many times you have believed in anybody and they have been cheats (e.g vino) you can't fully trust anyone.

 

[msjett]

A very thoughtfully written post BP. While I am not willing to speculate who is doing what, I am not naive enough to think that anyone is not capable of doing whatever it takes (and I mean whatever it takes, legal and illegal) to win.

I have nothing against BB, he is passionate about what he thinks and feels, and rightly is entitled to his opinions about what is happening within the sport. I have stated it before, I personally would love to see him put that passion into lobbying the powers that be, I think he would be great at it, look how much passion in others he stirs with his posts!!!!!

 

[benpounder]

I personally would love to see him put that passion into lobbying the powers that be, I think he would be great at it, look how much passion in others he stirs with his posts!!!!!

Actually, when BigBoat goes into details, I find his posts depressing. It is amazing just how far the vampires are behind their prey.

 

[ambrose]

I have nothing against BB, he is passionate about what he thinks and feels, and rightly is entitled to his opinions about what is happening within the sport.

i agree with this, however i do not respect the way on this forum, he's using bogus evidence to influence people. (regard my earlier post on the AIS). people are allowed to have opinions, people are allowed to voice them, but if you are going to try and provide something beyond opinion, such as giving sources and other evidence, please first check their credibility, and weather they apply to your argument and are beyond some form of idle speculation which anyone with half a brain can come up with.

 

[Captain Kirk]

I am not going to defend BigBoat per se. I will say that he is a bit more honest than a number of other commentors. Every few years some new 'hero cyclist' arrises and garners much adulation from cycling fans. Chances are that that revered rider will test positive, be accused of doping by a source considered by any of the legal authorities, or be closely linked to a rider/doctor/clinic that is under investigation: Kohl, Ricco, Landis, Valverde, Contador, Basso... Yet every year those of us active in the various cycling forums have seen the infatuated fan laud 'their' guy as the only one that really seems to be clean.

I know, I did it with both Hamilton and Landis.

But over time, an honest fan will recognize that their guy is just as succeptible to the temptations as the next to buy a precious few seconds. It is not necessarily a condemnation of the particular cyclist, rather an indictment of the entire cycling body. As anectdote, a number of years ago there was an interview with several NBA referees. It it they admited that there existed a tacit agreement between the NBA, the owners association, and the players union, that they should not foul out the star players, even when said star player was consistently committing fouls that other, lesser, players were being charged with. As with cycling, if a sport can not generate interest, it can not earn money. The riders are just playing their part, to be held liable for their flagrant violations to be sure, but not the evil culprit that the neophyte has been led to believe.

But to come to this conclusion, one has to be honest with oneself. Hero worship is dangerous on a number or front, but it's most blatant pitfall is it blinds us to faults and precludes honest and realistic evaluations. This becomes particularly apparent when one encounters another offering a caustic opinion of our hero. Instead of listening, one lashes out in rhetorical fury, protective of, and defensive for our hero.

Now you may think BigBoat is attacking your hero, but he really isnt. He is attacking the status quo of cycling that sets forth rules that allow doping, as long as certain lines are not crossed. And I think everyone here would concur that those lines are not just way too lenient, but way too fuzzy as well. Basso, Ricco, and Vino got busted and they are, or will soon be back in the pro pelaton - Heras, Kohl, and Ullrich got busted and are gone.

The question is, therefore, will we allow ourselves to be blinded by temporary devotion to a particular rider at the expense of the lasting integrity of our beloved sport.

Personally, I think Levi is a clean rider, I also think Cadel is clean, and Sastre as well. But with so many of their collegues proven, or implicated in doping schemes, there is no way in hell that I'd argue that they are indisputably clean. Statistically speaking, the odds are against them being clean.

Very valid points and I agree.
However, with Cadel I believe I believe the reaction was a passionate defence. Not a hero worship
Cadel has his faults, and not a marketers dream product. But completly over the top generalisations and statements require vigorous defense.

Hey, my hero was John Tomac (is).

One of our top downhillers (Micheal Ronning), went to compete on the NORBA circuit in the mid 90's.
He seeded against Tomac on his own turf and beat him.
This was mind blowing in Australia at the time. When interviewed about the mind games of standing on the start chute going head to head with JT( the first guy to wear skin suit (all black)) and who is the legend in the sport Ronning said,

....................."he maybe my hero, but he is only human, he can be beaten"

 

[benpounder]

...however i do not respect the way on this forum, he's using bogus evidence to influence people.

Every day, everywhere people use bogus evidence to influence people.

Mouthing comments about his right to express his opinion while objecting to the spin of his opinion sounds just a wee bit dictatorial... you know, like you really dont like the way he may influence people.

 

[BikeCentric]

I am not going to defend BigBoat per se. I will say that he is a bit more honest than a number of other commentors. Every few years some new 'hero cyclist' arrises and garners much adulation from cycling fans. Chances are that that revered rider will test positive, be accused of doping by a source considered by any of the legal authorities, or be closely linked to a rider/doctor/clinic that is under investigation: Kohl, Ricco, Landis, Valverde, Contador, Basso... Yet every year those of us active in the various cycling forums have seen the infatuated fan laud 'their' guy as the only one that really seems to be clean.

I know, I did it with both Hamilton and Landis.

But over time, an honest fan will recognize that their guy is just as succeptible to the temptations as the next to buy a precious few seconds. It is not necessarily a condemnation of the particular cyclist, rather an indictment of the entire cycling body. As anectdote, a number of years ago there was an interview with several NBA referees. It it they admited that there existed a tacit agreement between the NBA, the owners association, and the players union, that they should not foul out the star players, even when said star player was consistently committing fouls that other, lesser, players were being charged with. As with cycling, if a sport can not generate interest, it can not earn money. The riders are just playing their part, to be held liable for their flagrant violations to be sure, but not the evil culprit that the neophyte has been led to believe.

But to come to this conclusion, one has to be honest with oneself. Hero worship is dangerous on a number or front, but it's most blatant pitfall is it blinds us to faults and precludes honest and realistic evaluations. This becomes particularly apparent when one encounters another offering a caustic opinion of our hero. Instead of listening, one lashes out in rhetorical fury, protective of, and defensive for our hero.

Now you may think BigBoat is attacking your hero, but he really isnt. He is attacking the status quo of cycling that sets forth rules that allow doping, as long as certain lines are not crossed. And I think everyone here would concur that those lines are not just way too lenient, but way too fuzzy as well. Basso, Ricco, and Vino got busted and they are, or will soon be back in the pro pelaton - Heras, Kohl, and Ullrich got busted and are gone.

The question is, therefore, will we allow ourselves to be blinded by temporary devotion to a particular rider at the expense of the lasting integrity of our beloved sport.

Personally, I think Levi is a clean rider, I also think Cadel is clean, and Sastre as well. But with so many of their collegues proven, or implicated in doping schemes, there is no way in hell that I'd argue that they are indisputably clean. Statistically speaking, the odds are against them being clean.

That's a really good post dude.

 

[BikeCentric]

....................."he maybe my hero, but he is only human, he can be beaten"

That's a cool quote but it reminds me of a Schwarzeneggar quote:

"If it bleeds, we can kill it."

 

[Captain Kirk]

That's a cool quote but it reminds me of a Schwarzeneggar quote:

"If it bleeds, we can kill it."

LOL......your playing with my mind...was that from his election campaign or predator - the lines are blurring

 

[msjett]

Actually, when BigBoat goes into details, I find his posts depressing. It is amazing just how far the vampires are behind their prey.

I don't find them depressing......just repetative.