Exiting racers who dope

[kurtinsc]

I noticed when Ricco came back, some people were less then happy saying that they could never cheer for a proven doper. Others were very supportive saying things like "I'm glad he's back because he animates a race, even though he was a doper." Vinokourov had some similar reactions.

I'm beginning to see similar statements about Di Luca.

So my question... does being aggressive and exciting somehow make the doping less of a problem for some fans? And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

 

[Hugh Januss]

Exciting racers who are dopers: Very long list.

Boring racers who are dopers: Even longer list.

Exciting or boring racers who are not dopers: ................

 

[Michielveedeebee]

Exciting or boring racers who are not dopers: ................

David Moncoutie?

 

[Barnaby]

When I read the thread title I thought the OP was going to suggest having dopers 'offed' Soprano-style .

Hmmm... I suppose it would be more effective than anything the UCI can come up with.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

I thought the title meant racers who retire, but stay jacked to stomp in America's wicked masters scene...

 

[skidmark]

So my question... does being aggressive and exciting somehow make the doping less of a problem for some fans? And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

For me, the answer is no to both questions. Doping is not less of a 'problem' in Vino's case, but I'm more excited to see him come back to race than I would be someone relatively non-aggressive, like say Menchov if he got popped. For the second question, it's a qualified no... I have often wondered what the difference is between Vino and someone like Thomas Voeckler - they both go on suicidal attacks, but Vino just has more 'talent' to make them last sometimes. But I wonder how much of that might be due to relative doping... as I've never raced, let alone doped, it's hard for me to put into perspective what type of advantage doping would give over natural talent differences.

 

[kurtinsc]

When I read the thread title I thought the OP was going to suggest having dopers 'offed' Soprano-style .

Hmmm... I suppose it would be more effective than anything the UCI can come up with.

Oops... typo FTL. Sorry folks. Of course was supposed to be exciting.

 

[slowoldman]

And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

ABSOLUTELY!! It's a lot easier to be "agressive" when you aren't suffering as much as others thanks to your "top fuel". Anybody who argues differently hasn't raced against dopers or just hasn't raced period.

 

[Vonn Brinkman]

And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

Yes, just look at Ricco. He's obviously still on the dope. No question about it. But he animates the race, and can win, because he is on a heavy injection program again.

 

[Polish]

So my question... does being aggressive and exciting somehow make the doping less of a problem for some fans? And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

I believe one should be VERY discriminating when it comes to being a fan of a doper. "Agressiveness" and "exciting" are important attributes - but there is SO much more.

Not a fan of Riicco, not a fan of DiLuca, not a fan of Alberto....
Although I enjoy watching those dopers race of course.

These are the only dopers that I consider myself a true fan of:

1) FAUSTO!
2) Eddy
3) Lance
4) Sean K
5) Jan U
6) Tommy S
7) Marco P
8) Big Mig
9) Simeoni
10) Kimmage

 

[Altitude]

Some aren't bothered as much by doping, period. If a rider makes a race more interesting then of course you want him back in the sport. If you're a fan of a rider, why should you let what you already suspected change your opinion of him? A lot of people hate Ricco, but its mostly for the same reason that a lot of people hate Cavendish-- because he's good and he's arrogant. Not because he took EPO.

Those who truly believe that cycling can become a "clean" sport (w/e your definition of that is) are delusional. Besides, do you really want to see winning times of 45+ min up Alpe D'huez?

 

[Benotti69]

Some aren't bothered as much by doping, period. If a rider makes a race more interesting then of course you want him back in the sport. If you're a fan of a rider, why should you let what you already suspected change your opinion of him? A lot of people hate Ricco, but its mostly for the same reason that a lot of people hate Cavendish-- because he's good and he's arrogant. Not because he took EPO.

Those who truly believe that cycling can become a "clean" sport (w/e your definition of that is) are delusional. Besides, do you really want to see winning times of 45+ min up Alpe D'huez?

makes the suspense longer

 

[King Of Molehill]

Besides, do you really want to see winning times of 45+ min up Alpe D'huez?

Sure, makes me think I can be a pro too... if I were 20 years younger But seriously I like the idea of being able to associate a little bit with what the pro's are doing when I'm out on the bike but it's hard when the pro's are doing things that a body without PED's can't do.

 

[The Hitch]

I noticed when Ricco came back, some people were less then happy saying that they could never cheer for a proven doper. Others were very supportive saying things like "I'm glad he's back because he animates a race, even though he was a doper." Vinokourov had some similar reactions.

I'm beginning to see similar statements about Di Luca.

So my question... does being aggressive and exciting somehow make the doping less of a problem for some fans? And would some think that doping is what allowed these guys to be as aggressive as they were/are?

Its not a question of attacking riding. The point is more that everyone dopes. People hate Vino because they think he is a doper, while the people that were and are beating him - Cuddles, Menchov, Schleck etc are all squeeky clean.

But i and others have seen plenty of evidence to suggest that the peloton as a whole is dirty. I wont get on Vinos, or Di Lucas or Sellas or Valverdes back for doping, because they got punished while plenty of other dirty riders didnt.

Its not a question of attacking riding excusing doping. If you take the point of view that they all dope, then you end up cheering for the riders that make races interesting.

 

[Mambo95]

Besides, do you really want to see winning times of 45+ min up Alpe D'huez?

Without access to a clock, you probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 40 mins and 45 mins (they wouldn't be as long as 45 minutes. Herrera was doing 41 something in the 80s)

 

[The Hitch]

I believe one should be VERY discriminating when it comes to being a fan of a doper. "Agressiveness" and "exciting" are important attributes - but there is SO much more.

Not a fan of Riicco, not a fan of DiLuca, not a fan of Alberto....
Although I enjoy watching those dopers race of course.

These are the only dopers that I consider myself a true fan of:

1) FAUSTO!
2) Eddy
3) Lance
4) Sean K
5) Jan U
6) Tommy S
7) Marco P
8) Big Mig
9) Simeoni
10) Kimmage

Lol Fausto.
I know your list doesnt specify how much one doped, but compared to most people on your list Coppis doping programme today would be the equivalent of having a red bull before the race.

 

[Fourier]

This thread made me remember that Vino won LBL, how surreal. Let's see what DiLuca can pull off with Geox.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Sella is a nice example.

Pre-suspension: gets in lots of breaks, wins mountain stages from breakaways.
Post-suspension: gets in lots of breaks, finishes pretty well but not at the front in mountain stages except in some slightly smaller races like Austria.

Seems like he's pretty much the same rider, just without the dope this time. If you want to believe that Evans, Schleck and co are clean, then you ought to believe that since Puerto Valverde's been clean, since he wins more often than them and is tested more often anyway because of his reputation. And he brings more entertainment to races than most of them too.

Will be interesting to be around here in early 2012. A lot of people who supported Vino's and Riccò's comebacks were absolutely savaging Valverde as if Vino and the Cobra wouldn't have been doing the exact same thing in his position. Since Valverde's always brought a lot of fun to races, will he suddenly be reborn as a popular character now that he's served his time and so he joins the martyr crowd while the other dopers continue to ride on and get away with it? Or will he remain the bête noire of the forum?

Riccò - obviously huge talent. Complete douchebag, makes you want to punch him.

 

[roundabout]

Number of road stages won by Sella before Giro 2008 - 4 in over 4 years as a pro

Number of road stages won in 3 weeks in the Giro - 3

Sure, he didn't test positive during *that* Giro but the implication is obvious

And I'm sure Valverde was passing doping tests when he had blood bags stored @ clinico Fuentes.

 

[c&cfan]

guys... stop with this.

cyclist are dopers because they use something to make them perform better. chess players are dopers too. footbal players are also dopers. rugby players are dopers. students are dopers. everyone is a doper.

sports with dirty people (EPO CERA etc users): lots of them. and lots with more EPO CERA's users than cycling (rugby marathon decathlon etc etc). cycling is just 100x more tested.

and please dont talk about contador and others as "bad" dopers like diluca ricco vino etc. the clen amount (even if not taken from meat) is not doping since he cant make you perform better in anyway. so far, no proof that he is worse than cunego (a rider that you think that is clean because..because.. (you have no argument)). some of you are simply not cycling fans.

"everyone is a doper"-----why?----"because they are"---and cunego?---"no"---why?--"because he isnt." (stupid fans with no brain and proof of nothing...

"everyone is a doper.."---following the same logic, why isnt every piece of meat full of drugs?-- "because..because..because.. it's no legal!!!!" (stupid cycling "fan")

etc etc.... with time, i believe that cycling can be killed, by some of you.

 

[PCutter]

For me, there is no such thing as a doper that is exciting. Yes I loved wathcing Di Luca attack in the Giro, but when he went positive, it was hollowing. I'd rather watch riders be less aggressive than watch a doper blow a race appart. If they weren't doping they wouldn't be able to blow great riders off their wheel.

And no, I'm not naive enough to believe that doping isn't more wide spread than just those who are caught, but the more supporters, sponsors, and importantly managers turn their back on dopers, the cleaner the sport will become. The managers and teams who look closely at a riders history and their passport - beyond what tests as positive on the passport, but actually look at what the passport may be telling them - should be rewarded with entries to the big races.

If that means that a team of 'lesser' riders like Skil-Shimano (and I'm making a big assumption that Skil's management are true to their talk about looking past dopers) gets selected for the Tour over Vacensoleil who saw no problem signing Ricco and Mosquera, then I'm all for it. Soon the managers will get the message when their sponsor starts asking why they aren't getting selected for the tour. Money talks - and if getting punted from the big races is what it takes to get managers to pull their heads out of their ar$es, then so be it.

 

[hrotha]

guys... stop with this.

cyclist are dopers because they use something to make them perform better. chess players are dopers too. footbal players are also dopers. rugby players are dopers. students are dopers. everyone is a doper.

sports with dirty people (EPO CERA etc users): lots of them. and lots of more with more EPO CERA's users than cycling (rugby marathon decathlon etc etc). cycling is just 100more tested.

and please dont talk about contador and others as "bad" dopers like diluca ricco vino etc. the clen amount (even if not taken from meat) is not doping since he cant make you perform better in anyway. so far, no proof that he is worse than cunego (a rider that you think that is clean because..because.. (you have no argument))

I don't care about chess or rugby, and I don't care much about football either. I'm a cycling fan, and I want my sport to be clean.

Clen is banned, therefore it's doping. If you don't like it, this isn't the forum for you.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Number of road stages won by Sella before Giro 2008 - 4 in over 4 years as a pro

Number of road stages won in 3 weeks in the Giro - 3

Sure, he didn't test positive during *that* Giro but the implication is obvious

And I'm sure Valverde was passing doping tests when he had blood bags stored @ clinico Fuentes.

Yup - Sella was the same kind of rider he'd always been, but suddenly he was a lot BETTER. And now, since he's come back, he's the same kind of rider he always was pre-2008.

And Valverde passing doping tests while having blood bags with Fuentes is irrelevant to the point that he has been singled out as a bad guy for trying to avoid a suspension, while those who've been banned have not met with the same hostility. These guys are then martyred as if they voluntarily owned up, whereas if they'd been presented with a case as complicated as Valverde's they'd have behaved the same way. Even Sella didn't voluntarily own up - he was caught, and then told them everything afterward.

 

[dolophonic]

Its not a question of attacking riding. The point is more that everyone dopes. People hate Vino because they think he is a doper, while the people that were and are beating him - Cuddles, Menchov, Schleck etc are all squeeky clean.

But i and others have seen plenty of evidence to suggest that the peloton as a whole is dirty. I wont get on Vinos, or Di Lucas or Sellas or Valverdes back for doping, because they got punished while plenty of other dirty riders didnt.

Its not a question of attacking riding excusing doping. If you take the point of view that they all dope, then you end up cheering for the riders that make races interesting.

I'm with you on this. Well said.

 

[Altitude]

I believe one should be VERY discriminating when it comes to being a fan of a doper. "Agressiveness" and "exciting" are important attributes - but there is SO much more.

Not a fan of Riicco, not a fan of DiLuca, not a fan of Alberto....
Although I enjoy watching those dopers race of course.

These are the only dopers that I consider myself a true fan of:

1) FAUSTO!
2) Eddy
3) Lance
4) Sean K
5) Jan U
6) Tommy S
7) Marco P
8) Big Mig
9) Simeoni
10) Kimmage

Kimmage? haha, I wasn't aware anyone admired Kimmage as a rider. Did you actually know who he was before he wrote that book of his?