How many of the Tour de France riders do you think are doped?

How many of the Tour de France riders do you think are doped?

  • 80-100 %

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
Mar 10, 2009
6,158
0
0
Erythropoietin said:
"Dutch Anti-Doping Commission says up to 95 percent of riders doped in EPO-era"
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/doping-rampant-amongst-dutch-cyclists-earlier-report-says

Do you think it's any different today? I don't think so, they are performing just as well now as they did back then. There's absolutely no way to get rid of doping, and I strongly believe that the only solution is to legalize it. Vote and discuss.
What a coincidence, your username, your topic and .... :D
 

DanielsDad

BANNED
Aug 22, 2013
66
0
0
Talking about the solution yesterday...

When you become a pro in UCI, they administer EPO to get you to 50% hematocrit. This way we have doctors and safety 1st. No back alley needles and such.

We can add other PEDs to the list too. Then the only cheaters will be the ones not doping.
 
I assume you are talking about 2013 and are referring to any use of banned PED's at any time in the 2013 season by any of the riders selected to ride the 2013 TDF. It is not clear what you mean.
 
Mar 10, 2009
1,296
0
0
I am sure there are a few but the number of dopes that post in threads like this are far too many.
 
Jul 5, 2011
858
0
0
For TDF the percentage has to be high, whether its old known substances or new lesser known ones. In the course of a three week tour hematocrit levels will drop drastically unless boosted, severely affecting performance whether GC rider or domestique. After the festina affair in 98 and operation puerto in 06 the dopers carried right on regardless, didn't blink, there's no reason to think attitudes have changed post Lance.
Legalising stuff though is for medical experts to consider. A riders health should be paramount both during and after their career.
 
Jun 24, 2013
92
0
0
rainman said:
For TDF the percentage has to be high, whether its old known substances or new lesser known ones. In the course of a three week tour hematocrit levels will drop drastically unless boosted, severely affecting performance whether GC rider or domestique. After the festina affair in 98 and operation puerto in 06 the dopers carried right on regardless, didn't blink, there's no reason to think attitudes have changed post Lance.
Legalising stuff though is for medical experts to consider. A riders health should be paramount both during and after their career.
Did you see the recent study showing that Tour de France riders live longer than the general population? Even with all the anabolic steroids and amphetamine, they are healthier.

Legalization with a 50 % hematocrit level could very well be the best solution. What would be the point of keeping drugs illegal? To keep doing the stuff that doesn't work? To ensure that only liars succeed also in the future? It's totally pointless to compete clean unless you enjoy losing. The drug tests are a joke, and the prohibition is beyond brilliant.
 
Jul 11, 2013
291
0
0
happychappy said:
Of course it's no different. The same can be said for every single professional sport.
So when the best of the cheaters gets caught, we'll all have the next guy to hunt down. That's why I keep saying it's all really a matter of which doper you are a fan of, more so than *if* they are cheating. Look, there's no way the entire 200 rider peloton in the Tour is clean. Even if it's 10% (no way it's that low), that's 20 guys. There's no way a clean rider is beating all 20 dirty riders. At least a few of those guys are going to respond well enough to the dope to beat any of the clean riders (over 3 weeks). So thus, almost assuredly, the winners of all these GT's are doping. It's just the mathematics of it. Like you say, same in every other sport. We'll try to catch the best of the cheaters, and when they are caught, we'll move on to the next guy in line.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY