Gripper grasping at straws

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Parker said:
The same reason people go to BUPA instead of the NHS- a better service and no waiting list.

If there's a big pile up how long do you think it is going to take the race doctor to attend to 40 riders? By week three of a Grand Tour there will be a hundred riders with something wrong with them.
a pile up for what? band aid?
in a hypothetical clean peloton there won't be any pile up.
 
Aug 27, 2012
1,436
0
0
There is an opportunity for the medical associations to "strike off" registered medical doctors ie. de-license them, if they prescribe blatantly out of label and with no medical benefit/ potential serious harm. Ie. EPO and PEDs.

And hence an opportunity for Wada/national anti-doping agencies/government sports ministries to enlist the aid of the national medical associations...

Very easy to do as it's just not justifiable medical practice and certainly contravenes many aspects of medical licence registration...
 
May 19, 2012
537
0
0
Benotti69 said:
why do teams need doctors when the races all have a doctor?
They don't.

Parker said:
The same reason people go to BUPA instead of the NHS- a better service and no waiting list.

If there's a big pile up how long do you think it is going to take the race doctor to attend to 40 riders? By week three of a Grand Tour there will be a hundred riders with something wrong with them.
Yeah but the problem is that some doctors are willing to classify low hormones and hematocrits as "something wrong with them."

To address rider's needs maybe Pro Tour teams can contribute to Medical Neutral Support?

Tinman said:
There is an opportunity for the medical associations to "strike off" registered medical doctors ie. de-license them, if they prescribe blatantly out of label and with no medical benefit/ potential serious harm. Ie. EPO and PEDs.

And hence an opportunity for Wada/national anti-doping agencies/government sports ministries to enlist the aid of the national medical associations...

Very easy to do as it's just not justifiable medical practice and certainly contravenes many aspects of medical licence registration...
Good Point.
 
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Benotti69 said:
why do teams need doctors when the races all have a doctor?
Why do races have Doctors when all the teams have Doctors?
Why do teams bring mechanics when there is neutral service at every race?
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Why do races have Doctors when all the teams have Doctors?
Why do teams bring mechanics when there is neutral service at every race?
What came first the chicken or the egg.

I guess that the tradition was to have a doctor at the race as teams did not have their own doctors.

The neutral service is mostly publicity nowadays. They rarely seem to do much in a GT. Their real value comes in races like Paris Roubaix where they do much of it on motorbikes for the wheel changes.

Teams bring mechanics for the pre stage maintenance and after stage maintenance same as the team doctors. Just we also know what the 'maintenance' the team docs do. Backdated TUEs for example

As for pile ups, lacerations and cuts dont need doctors per se and good soigneur can treat such things, for the more serious stuff there is the race doc. After that it is the hospital.
 
Sep 29, 2012
12,197
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Why do races have Doctors when all the teams have Doctors?
Why do teams bring mechanics when there is neutral service at every race?
team mechanics do regular oil and grease changes on the bikes.
are you suggesting team doctors do regular <....> and <...> on the riders?

also: there are typically 3x the number of bikes as there are riders.
 
Benotti69 said:
why do teams need doctors when the races all have a doctor?
Well if you believe that sports science(non doping) has any benefit whatsoever to performance, then it makes sense to have sports doctors on a team. Having a full-time member focused solely on your team should be more efficient than a part-time one who is working with other things.

Like any service, the more people you have, the more effective the service should be. So 4 doctors for 30 riders should prove more beneficial than 1 doctor for 30 riders.

Guess it all depends on what benefits people put on sports science.
 
May 26, 2010
28,144
1
0
pmcg76 said:
Well if you believe that sports science(non doping) has any benefit whatsoever to performance, then it makes sense to have sports doctors on a team. Having a full-time member focused solely on your team should be more efficient than a part-time one who is working with other things.

Like any service, the more people you have, the more effective the service should be. So 4 doctors for 30 riders should prove more beneficial than 1 doctor for 30 riders.

Guess it all depends on what benefits people put on sports science.

All depends of what is 'sports science' in cycling. A good doc with an assistant should be able to look after 30 riders over a season. Jeez they dont even race every week from Feb to Oct like the 80's.

I also would have thought that the 'sports science' is not done during a race. Hence we have places like the Mapei centre for the science of sport where riders go testing and applying sports science in the off season

I wonder how many patients a cancer doctor sees a week, 100, more, less and these are people whose lives are threatened.
 
Benotti69 said:
All depends of what is 'sports science' in cycling. A good doc with an assistant should be able to look after 30 riders over a season. Jeez they dont even race every week from Feb to Oct like the 80's.

I also would have thought that the 'sports science' is not done during a race. Hence we have places like the Mapei centre for the science of sport where riders go testing and applying sports science in the off season

I wonder how many patients a cancer doctor sees a week, 100, more, less and these are people whose lives are threatened.
Yes and those people **** up regularly, I have plenty experience of that in recent times. I can tell you that often there are 3-4 doctors on hand in dealing with a cancer patient. If there were more doctors, I would expect a much better service and less mistakes.

Unless you work in the field, I don't see how you can claim what the optimun ratio is for the area of sports science.

Agree there is less need for doctors at the races but if a rider falls ill or picks up injuries, I would rather have a qualified person on hand over a glorified masseur. It's about getting the best treatment(non-doping)available.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
pmcg76 said:
Well if you believe that sports science(non doping) has any benefit whatsoever to performance, then it makes sense to have sports doctors on a team. Having a full-time member focused solely on your team should be more efficient than a part-time one who is working with other things.

Like any service, the more people you have, the more effective the service should be. So 4 doctors for 30 riders should prove more beneficial than 1 doctor for 30 riders.

Guess it all depends on what benefits people put on sports science.
We've seen what Leinders was hired for at Rabo.
Had little to do with sports science.
Basically all we know about cycling docs is that they administer doping and do bloodtransfusions. The "science" angle is relatively new. A smokescreen imo.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
Dear Wiggo said:
team mechanics do regular oil and grease changes on the bikes.
are you suggesting team doctors do regular <....> and <...> on the riders?
:)nice one
 
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
0
0
Dear Wiggo said:
team mechanics do regular oil and grease changes on the bikes.
are you suggesting team doctors do regular <....> and <...> on the riders?

also: there are typically 3x the number of bikes as there are riders.
The mechanics do oil changes, on road bikes? Learn something new....:rolleyes:


When you are requiring a team of 8 or 9 riders to go to their limit I do think it is prudent to have a Doctor on the team regardless if the team is doping or not doping.
 
sniper said:
We've seen what Leinders was hired for at Rabo.
Had little to do with sports science.
Basically all we know about cycling docs is that they administer doping and do bloodtransfusions. The "science" angle is relatively new. A smokescreen imo.
We are not talking specifically about Leinders role here. We are talking about why cycling teams need sports doctors in general.

Are you saying that genuine non-doping sports science has no role in modern sport?

Would also like to point out that Dr.Luigi Cecchini was protrayed as a doping doctor and I would have gone along with that idea. However, comments from a number of convicted dopers have said that Cecchini tried to minimize the use of drugs and focus on other areas like training, diet etc. Cecchini was regarded as one of the best sports scientists out there.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,856
0
0
came on after remembering dodger.

by my reckoning, Cuddles was earler tho.

the journalist Rene (Cyclingheroes) told me about a Telekom pre-season training camp/promotion soiree, when Cuddles said so. So this puts it 2003.

And the testing he admitted to was around 2001 with Ferrari when he rode on the Saeco team as a stagiare at Tour of Austria.

Rominger and Ferrari are pretty close, think Ferrari had a piece of his management agency that went on to become IMG cyling division.

folks can correct my info.

and Rogers, who has admitted recently before he went to Saxo-Tinkoff, was with Rominger in his first year at T-Mobile, but definitely the last years of Quickstep when he was winning the World Champs in the chrono.

think Ferrari thought Evans was a dunce
 
"The 2011 Tour de France was a bit of a landmark ... the fact that Cadel (Evans) won, that was the cherry on top of the cake,'' she said.
It's more the "I know this person is clean, they won this race clean, therefore cycling is clean" logic. Has been used on a few GT winners recently but surprisingly not the Spaniards?
 
May 27, 2012
6,458
0
0
I like how some people slurp themselves and pretend it's objectivity.

Anyway, to suggest that the peloton is clean now is fanciful, but I do believe it is cleaner than it was. I do believe riders like Phinney and many of the younger European riders are riding clean. I think this is exerting pressure on riders to not perform in an extraterrestrial way anymore for fear of sticking out. I think this is a very new development when you look at how just a couple of years ago, amazing feats were still happening in the spring classics, etc. I also believe JV when he says he is trying to do it the right way. I used to flame the guy more than anyone here (check the tape), but he has convinced me he is genuinely dedicated to clean cycling. If he hasn't convinced you, I can respect that because he did ride during one of the dirtiest periods of cycling and he did participate. If that puts me at the head of the "slurp" line, so be it.

Notwithstanding any of that, I am going to enjoy this spring's races.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
Ferminal said:
It's more the "I know this person is clean, they won this race clean, therefore cycling is clean" logic. Has been used on a few GT winners recently but surprisingly not the Spaniards?
Sastre gets some love.
 
May 18, 2009
3,758
0
0
ChewbaccaD said:
I like how some people slurp themselves and pretend it's objectivity.

Anyway, to suggest that the peloton is clean now is fanciful, but I do believe it is cleaner than it was. I do believe riders like Phinney and many of the younger European riders are riding clean. I think this is exerting pressure on riders to not perform in an extraterrestrial way anymore for fear of sticking out. I think this is a very new development when you look at how just a couple of years ago, amazing feats were still happening in the spring classics, etc. I also believe JV when he says he is trying to do it the right way. I used to flame the guy more than anyone here (check the tape), but he has convinced me he is genuinely dedicated to clean cycling. If he hasn't convinced you, I can respect that because he did ride during one of the dirtiest periods of cycling and he did participate. If that puts me at the head of the "slurp" line, so be it.

Notwithstanding any of that, I am going to enjoy this spring's races.
I did not say that JV's heart was not in the right place. I was talking about how who he claims is clean is suspect (Wiggans 2009/12, his AC evaluation BS, etc), and how his 'ryder' winning GT's at this time should be suspect while he is publicly clamoring for more testing. That in my mind is suspect, YMMV. People believing him just because he comes in here has happened, and you know it. That is different from what you are saying.

Methinks he has a delicate schtick going on, preaching cleanliness while waiting for the day when PED use is less prevalent, but he has to remain relevant while waiting and working towards that day. Winning does that.

I don't dislike JV and I agree with you he is the best hope. Heck, if it doesn't work out he can always become CEO of a fortune 500 company with all of his options he brags about.
 
blackcat said:
came on after remembering dodger.

by my reckoning, Cuddles was earler tho.

the journalist Rene (Cyclingheroes) told me about a Telekom pre-season training camp/promotion soiree, when Cuddles said so. So this puts it 2003.

And the testing he admitted to was around 2001 with Ferrari when he rode on the Saeco team as a stagiare at Tour of Austria.

Rominger and Ferrari are pretty close, think Ferrari had a piece of his management agency that went on to become IMG cyling division.

folks can correct my info.

and Rogers, who has admitted recently before he went to Saxo-Tinkoff, was with Rominger in his first year at T-Mobile, but definitely the last years of Quickstep when he was winning the World Champs in the chrono.

think Ferrari thought Evans was a dunce
Where's CyclingHeros these days? Does he post here?
 
Jul 28, 2009
898
0
0
pmcg76 said:
Well if you believe that sports science(non doping) has any benefit whatsoever to performance, then it makes sense to have sports doctors on a team.
But most of these doctors are not sports scientists. In fact in most sports you don't use medically qualified people to do sports science, you use sports scientists who are actually probably better qualified for that role. The only reason you would need a clinician is the administration of 'medication' and dealing with injury and illness. I've always found the way cycling uses clinicians to be a bit odd and I've drawn my own conclusions as to the reasons behind it.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY