Is cycling getting cleaner ?

[Andynonomous]

This is similar to another post, but I thought I would add a poll to get a feeling for the "public sentiment".


1) Cycling never has had a significant problem with doping.

2) I am encouraged by what I see, and am cautiously optomistic that pro cycling is headed in the right direction (cleaner, more fair competition).

3) I believe that, although there may be a small improvement at this time, any gains will be temporary as long as the conflicts of interest continue to exist in cycling's testing, appeals, and sanctioning regimes.

4) Cycling is dirtier than ever.

 

[L'arriviste]

I selected "the improvement is just temporary" but I would qualify that as "the perception of improvement is just temporary".

Yesterday evening, I graphed the prevalence of doping-related incidents in the European professional road scene as reported over the last twenty years and found that, certainly since haematocrit testing began, the trend appears as a series of waves. If that holds true, the graph suggests that we are in the low part of a trough this year.

 

[Escarabajo]

Define cleaner please.

 

[Grand Tourist]

I went for temporary improvement.

No doubt blood doping & steroids etc are harder to get away with these days but as soon as the little tinkers find a new method of doping they'll be 'at it' again faster than a rat up a drain pipe. This is a ceasefire & nothing more.

 

[sniper]

It's quite clear that cycling is as dirty as ever.

There are no sponsors showing any reluctance to sponsor the likes of AC, Vino, Riis, Rhis, Bruyneel, etc. Even a guy like Ricco might be getting a third chance.

So doping (or having doped) really means nothing to the people inside of cycling. Look at how Vino is being cheered.
Even AC's positive is no longer an issue, except in the German press of course.

The true whistleblowers (e.g. Jaksche, Floyd), on the other hand, are not given a chance at all to return in cycling.

Also, the ASO has a set of rules that allows it to keep a controversial rider like Contador from participating in the tour de F.
But, surprise surprise, they didn't take that option.

Considering this, how can anybody seriously argue that cycling is getting cleaner?

The writing's pretty much on the wall.

 

[Andynonomous]

It is interesting that, despite the characterization that most clinic respondents are cynics, most people (at the time of this posting) seem to have a positive view of cycling's future.

 

[craptastic]

Just as dirty. Only different dosage and drugs.

 

[Polish]

Pro Cycling usually becomes cleaner in the weeks and month that follow the TdF lol.

But is cycling cleaner for the long haul?

An argument could be made that cycling is dirtier than it has ever been.
But that is not a choice in the poll.

After all, cycling has continually become dirtier since its inception.
Cleaner periods and dirtier periods of course - but trending dirtier.

Are the doping techniques in 2011 more advanced than in 2001?
Of course they are.
And will they be more advanced in 2021?
Of course again.

At the present time, the general public views cycling as a filthy joke sport.
That will even get worse probably.

But it is heartening to see that a majority in the clinic view the sport as cleaner

 

[Anonymous]

less dirty than it was in terms of quantities of drugs being used, but no less dirty in the percentage of riders taking them.

 

[sniper]

Pro Cycling usually becomes cleaner in the weeks and month that follow the TdF lol.

But is cycling cleaner for the long haul?

An argument could be made that cycling is dirtier than it has ever been.
But that is not a choice in the poll.

After all, cycling has continually become dirtier since its inception.
Cleaner periods and dirtier periods of course - but trending dirtier.

Are the doping techniques in 2011 more advanced than in 2001?
Of course they are.
And will they be more advanced in 2021?
Of course again.

At the present time, the general public views cycling as a filthy joke sport.
That will even get worse probably.

But it is heartening to see that a majority in the clinic view the sport as cleaner

See? You are able to think clear and argue irresistably.

 

[luckyboy]

less dirty than it was in terms of quantities of drugs being used, but no less dirty in the percentage of riders taking them.

Yeah this..

 

[sniper]

Bro, power has very little to do with speed. You have to look at power numbers that's the performance.

If it was all about speed then my mother riding at 30 mph with a 30 mph tailwind must be doped.

The FTP (funtional threshold power) on Flecha was close to 410 watts and he is meas-ling around in the 40-60 places, couldnt even win a stage. If he's FTP is 410 what was Thor's? 475 watts!!

I guarantee the best Lemond or Fingon would have done in this year;s TDF would have been what they got in the first epo Tour 1991. 6th or 7th....Tops. Heck probably more like 30th.

Doping still goes on, its evident in the amount of power you need just to ride the time trial stages without being eliminated.

Flecha was at 375 watts sitting at the back of the train drafting. Try holding 375, ha! Most doped pros and cat 1s in the USA wouldnt be able to hold the wheels let alone pull.

Interesting.

Since I'm no good in numbers, I have to accept people telling me cycling's cleaner now (although common sense tells me that it isn't), because the clocked times uphill were supposedly slower this year than in previous years.
But this post by Bigboat (which i took from another thread) gives a different picture all together.

 

[Quagmire]

Interesting.

Since I'm no good in numbers, I have to accept people telling me cycling's cleaner now (although common sense tells me that it isn't), because the clocked times uphill were supposedly slower this year than in previous years.
But this post by Bigboat (which i took from another thread) gives a different picture all together.

Flecha's FTP power is not unbelieveable when you calculate watts/kilo i.e 5.7 w/k. If Hushovd could produce 5.7 w/k, his FTP would be 467 watts - I would not be surprised if Cancellara was around this mark.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It is interesting that, despite the characterization that most clinic respondents are cynics, most people (at the time of this posting) seem to have a positive view of cycling's future.

To me whats interesting is that this always appear to be one of the most debated subjects here - not this poll per se, as you have rightly tapped in to what is being thought.

There appears to be a yearning for a 'cleaner' performance which leads to much debate about the apparent cleanliness of the sport.

For me what it shows is that cycling fans have little faith in the 'message' that is coming from cyclings stakeholders (riders, teams, UCI).

So it is almost irrelevant if cycling is actually cleaner or not - there is a distrust of the stakeholders and IMO this will never change as long as the same people are involved in running the sport.

(FWIW - I think there is slightly less numbers doping using the same products more sparingly - slightly cleaner.)

 

[Bag_O_Wallet]

To me whats interesting is that this always appear to be one of the most debated subjects here - not this poll per se, as you have rightly tapped in to what is being thought.

There appears to be a yearning for a 'cleaner' performance which leads to much debate about the apparent cleanliness of the sport.

For me what it shows is that cycling fans have little faith in the 'message' that is coming from cyclings stakeholders (riders, teams, UCI).

So it is almost irrelevant if cycling is actually cleaner or not - there is a distrust of the stakeholders and IMO this will never change as long as the same people are involved in running the sport.

(FWIW - I think there is slightly less numbers doping using the same products more sparingly - slightly cleaner.)

Indeed, Doc. It feels like we keep getting sold the same line of things being cleaner since the Festina Affair.

I'd like to believe it is, but I don't trust the sales people.

 

[powerste]

I'd like to believe it is, but I don't trust the sales people.

Perfectly stated!

I'm a "middle ground" type of person and generally not one for absolutes, but even I believe the current crop has suffered a permanent and irreversible lack of credibility.

 

[Velodude]

Certainly cleaner now since the malignant regrowth has gone into remission for a second time!

(Apologies for a near plagiarisation of Paul Kimmage)

 

[Zinoviev Letter]

Distinguishing between options 2 and 3 seems to rely on the voter's talents as a soothsayer.

I believe that there are currently fewer riders doping than there have been in some recent periods, but there are still substantial numbers doping. I believe that doping methods are currently less effective than they have been in recent times. Whether this trend will continue or will quickly reverse itself is dependent on a large number of variables.

 

[ianfra]

Distinguishing between options 2 and 3 seems to rely on the voter's talents as a soothsayer.

I believe that there are currently fewer riders doping than there have been in some recent periods, but there are still substantial numbers doping. I believe that doping methods are currently less effective than they have been in recent times. Whether this trend will continue or will quickly reverse itself is dependent on a large number of variables.

And your proof is .....? Or is this Just another "I know it all without evidence" statement from a poster who has the monopoly on truth?????

 

[L'arriviste]

And your proof is .....? Or is this Just another "I know it all without evidence" statement from a poster who has the monopoly on truth?????

Steady on, eh? This isn't the Millar autobiog thread. The user did preface his/her remark with "I believe". Nobody can prove the Man Upstairs exists but lots of people still believe in it.

What was said just above here was spot on: it's all a question of perception. There are lots of truths in pro cycling and each of us has a monopoly on his/her own.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Can there be a "too hard to say" option? I am not sure and I don't know what to believe anymore regarding doping.

 

[sniper]

56% thinks it's getting better?
I'm stunned.

56% fooled by the pro-cycling community.

nothing wrong with wishful thinking of course.
but this is a poll, which is where you should let rationality speak.

 

[movingtarget]

Can there be a "too hard to say" option? I am not sure and I don't know what to believe anymore regarding doping.

I think most people are in this category but would never admit it. To be honest, I no longer care. I accept that more people will be caught and know they will be dealt with. I like to concentrate on the racing and accept the results at face value until someone proves otherwise. But at the same time I have never accepted the assertion that everyone is doping. It's just that it's too hard to tell who is or isn't so I prefer to leave it to the authorites to do their job and hopefully do it well. The fact that non winners are being caught as well as frequent winners shows how hard it is to predict based on performance. With sports betting such a big deal now, it would not surprise me to find that some riders are deliberately underperforming to land betting coups at the urging of others. This has happened a lot in other sports including boxing, cricket and football. Some riders worried that the odds for being caught doping now have reduced, may be willing to try other means. As usual money and fame are at the root of the cheating.

 

[Anonymous]

56% thinks it's getting better?
I'm stunned.

56% fooled by the pro-cycling community.

nothing wrong with wishful thinking of course.
but this is a poll, which is where you should let rationality speak.

actaully 80% think it has improved either temporarily or more permenantly

only 15% think its as bad as ever.

 

[Winterfold]

but this is a poll, which is where you should let rationality speak.

Indeed and the rational mind can see the 5-10% decrease in average times to go up the major climbs. And can therefore deduce less doping as a plausible explanation.

Provide us with some other rational explanations...

Are bikes getting heavier?

Are riders still doping but deliberately going slower?

Have the French Authorities invented a super sticky new tarmac but provided Europcar with secret non-stick tyres?

Please indulge us irrational losers and give us the benefit of your rational omniscience...