• 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!

How to get rid of doping in pro cycling...

Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Visit site
... not

"The queen stage of the 2012 Giro d'Italia will climb the Mortirolo on its way to a mountain-top finish at the Stelvio. The mountain showdown will come on the race's penultimate day on Saturday, May 26.

"Never before has a major world event attempted this type of initiative,” race organisers said. The stage will be 218km long with a total of approximately 5,900 metres of climbing."

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/mortirolo-and-stelvio-to-feature-on-penultimate-day-of-giro-ditalia

I am sure people will find harder from days gone by, but... :rolleyes:
 
Oct 15, 2009
179
0
0
Visit site
You make a very good point, considering that 100m sprinters such as Marion Jones or Ben Johnson would never take drugs, as their races are so short and flat, right?
 
the idea that riders dope because the course is too hard is (and has always been) ludicrous.

all they have to do is go slower as they used to (before epo and blood doping).

epo and blood doping is used to gain a competitive advantage.

the problem is that, once some riders used/abused, the advantage they gained was so much that others were no longer competitive and would soon be out of a job.

if the races were easier they would still dope to gain an advantage.

check out the races pre-epo and they are just as hard, simply slower, and -- arguably -- way more exciting. that's why everyone loved this year's tour, not because it was necessarily clean, but because it reminded people how cleaner cycling looked and how much more dramatic it is.
 
Winterfold said:
I reckon that ride would be 10 or 11 hours for me, with a major existential crisis at some point. Wonder what they will do it in?

It'd take me every bit of sunlight, an insane amount of sugar and electrolyte, and several projections of intense fixated hatred to get up the really steep parts. Even still, I'm not sure I could handle more than 20 percent pitch. I'm not sure I'd have the guts for the descents either.
 
MarkvW said:
It'd take me every bit of sunlight, an insane amount of sugar and electrolyte, and several projections of intense fixated hatred to get up the really steep parts. Even still, I'm not sure I could handle more than 20 percent pitch. I'm not sure I'd have the guts for the descents either.

When I get to about 20% I struggle to stay on my bike. Literally I find it hard to keep upright I think it may be because of an inner ear/balance problem.
 
MarkvW said:
It'd take me every bit of sunlight, an insane amount of sugar and electrolyte, and several projections of intense fixated hatred to get up the really steep parts. Even still, I'm not sure I could handle more than 20 percent pitch. I'm not sure I'd have the guts for the descents either.

I think I would just give up. For the descents I would just hope I don't crash.
 
Animal said:
Not talking about it means it doesn't happen?

In what alternative universe?

Do you really think the 10 misfits who talk about doping in the clinic on a regular basis have any impact? Enjoy the sport for what it is, it's still a beautiful display of grit and desire. This "cleanish" version of the sport is better to watch than a few years ago but I loved it all. The point is, talking about it doesn't help either. That's for the sport to fix, not some obsessed forum trolls who introduce Armstrong into every discussion. (see above for an example)
 
May 18, 2009
3,757
0
0
Visit site
Big Doopie said:
the idea that riders dope because the course is too hard is (and has always been) ludicrous.

all they have to do is go slower as they used to (before epo and blood doping).

epo and blood doping is used to gain a competitive advantage.

the problem is that, once some riders used/abused, the advantage they gained was so much that others were no longer competitive and would soon be out of a job.

if the races were easier they would still dope to gain an advantage.
.

Back on topic.

This.
 
JRTinMA said:
Do you really think the 10 misfits who talk about doping in the clinic on a regular basis have any impact? Enjoy the sport for what it is, it's still a beautiful display of grit and desire. This "cleanish" version of the sport is better to watch than a few years ago but I loved it all. The point is, talking about it doesn't help either. That's for the sport to fix, not some obsessed forum trolls who introduce Armstrong into every discussion. (see above for an example)

Word!... Spoken like a true M@sshole! And as a former native son... I mean that as a compliment of the highest regard.
 
JRTinMA said:
Do you really think the 10 misfits who talk about doping in the clinic on a regular basis have any impact? Enjoy the sport for what it is, it's still a beautiful display of grit and desire. This "cleanish" version of the sport is better to watch than a few years ago but I loved it all. The point is, talking about it doesn't help either. That's for the sport to fix, not some obsessed forum trolls who introduce Armstrong into every discussion. (see above for an example)

Non sequitur.

You were basically just saying shaddup!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
JRTinMA said:
Do you really think the 10 misfits who talk about doping in the clinic on a regular basis have any impact? Enjoy the sport for what it is, it's still a beautiful display of grit and desire. This "cleanish" version of the sport is better to watch than a few years ago but I loved it all. The point is, talking about it doesn't help either. That's for the sport to fix, not some obsessed forum trolls who introduce Armstrong into every discussion. (see above for an example)

But you counter your point right there. If it were not for the opposition to doping expressed by fans of the sport, it wouldn't even be "cleanish," now would it? Surely a single forum could not accomplish that, but removal of such a forum reduces the number of voices against doping. There is no central organization for display and petition against doping. It is the thousands of voices scattered over a plethora of media that express their displeasure with doping that results in the hollow, vapid response of the UCI. The hope is that eventually, those voices will too cause dishonest, culpable men like Fat Pat to be removed from power. Sure, he will be replaced with someone who is marginally better, but history most times is changed in small increments. It is the drip of discontent that will eventually erode the rock.
 
Jul 30, 2009
1,735
0
0
Visit site
perhaps my initial statement was too absolute, but it was sarcastic, ironic, rather than a logical argument.

On easier courses, clean riders have more of a chance to compete. Of course , it's not going to stop doping having less ridiculous courses, but things this hard give them no chance.

That stage, you're going to have to charge just to make the time cut, it's evil, sadistic and will no doubt be welcomed by fans with open arms.

I've thought about it some more and think 10-11 hours is too optimistic - its more like 12 for me - they will take 7 I reckon - it's just madness.
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
JRTinMA said:
Do you really think the 10 misfits who talk about doping in the clinic on a regular basis have any impact? Enjoy the sport for what it is, it's still a beautiful display of grit and desire. This "cleanish" version of the sport is better to watch than a few years ago but I loved it all. The point is, talking about it doesn't help either. That's for the sport to fix, not some obsessed forum trolls who introduce Armstrong into every discussion. (see above for an example)

....and yet here you are on a forum with our usual pro Armstrong and his doping :rolleyes: