Is The Clinic meant to be ANTI-doping?

[Granville57]

So as not to derail another thread, I've copied the following exchange so as to have a separate place for its own discussion.

I have to say the fact so many Clinicians seem to hold a love-in for Dirty Bertie always amuses me when I lurk here though; proven drugs cheat but hey, he looks great on the bike huh?

I think that's partly due to a huge misconception about The Clinic, that is often put forward as a criticism of The Clinic—that being that The Clinic is supposed to be this bastion of ANTI-DOPING.

Where that comes from, I've no idea.

The Clinic is a place to DISCUSS doping, and since the very topic isn't even "allowed" into other some other sections of the forum, this is where the doping talk takes place.

The Clinic was never established as The International Center to Stamp Out Doping. It's simply a place to discuss it without people whining about the fact that it's being discussed.

Some people are vehemently anti-doping.
Some people would prefer a free-for-all.
Some people are completely ambivalent on the matter.
Some people hold more than one view depending on any number of issues.

It is not the responsibility of The Clinic to end doping or to crucify every single person who dopes. It is a place to further one's understanding of doping.

People are free to cheer for whatever doper, or as many dopers as they like. Doing so doesn't make that person a hypocrite just because they post in The Clinic.

No one signed an agreement of being anti-doping when they showed up here. It's simply not part of the equation.

As the sub-title of this sub-forum indicates, the purpose of The Clinic is to "discuss doping-realted issues."

It seems quite straight forward to me.

Fair point. I tend to assume that anybody who cares about the sport enough to want to discuss it on an online forum is anti-doping by default since I can't think of a single positive aspect to it, but perhaps I erred in that assumption.

(I know I only have four posts but I've lurked here for about 2 years by the way so I'm not a total noob - the general flavour of the Clinic is certainly anti-doping, regardless of whether it's actually a formal prerequisite for posting.)

 

[Granville57]

It is certainly not my intention to single out OldCranky here. The same sentiments have been expressed by others in the past.

But I do wonder, is there a general sentiment that The Clinic should be anti-doping?

Is it considered by many to be "anti-doping by default," as suggested?

I've never seen it that way, and it seems the topic deserves its own thread.

 

[Granville57]

I can't think of a single positive aspect to it, but perhaps I erred in that assumption.

That is (perhaps unintentionally) a brilliant play on words.

But I don't think the topic of doping needs to be looked at in a positive or negative light (there's just no way getting around all the innuendo here ).

It's a broad topic that can be discussed without the emotional attachment. Of course emotions will come into play, and that's fine. But emotions don't need to drive the entire conversation, nor do morals and ethics. There are many aspects to the topic, and they will (and should) shape the conversation in many different ways.

 

[King Boonen]

A fraction of cheats are caught by anti-doping measures. It is just as likely that anyone who is winning big races that you cheer for is also doping. So in reality I see little difference between cheering for a known doper and cheering for a suspected doper.

 

[Granville57]

A fraction of cheats are caught by anti-doping measures. It is just as likely that anyone who is winning big races that you cheer for is also doping. So in reality I see little difference between cheering for a known doper and cheering for a suspected doper.

Precisely. Because when it comes right down to it, I can never truly KNOW what any of these riders are up to. Even if I'm convinced they're all doping, I have no way of knowing who's program is the most expensive, advanced or effective.

If I suspect them to be "mostly" clean, I'll never know who may have bent the rules just a tiny bit (or more).

If they're all totally clean...well, then good for them. But EPO busts are still in the news, even as recently as today. So they're not ALL clean. That's the only thing I know with absolute certainty.

 

[SeriousSam]

The clinic seems to be a platform where doping can be discussed openly. The resulting chatter, with its healthy disagreements and personal vendettas, is amusing and informative. The ignorance and hypocrisy displayed by certain posters can at times be startling.

 

[the sceptic]

that the clinic should be anti doping is a skybot argument used when they feel uncomfortable with sky getting more attention than other dopers.

its up to each person if they want to be anti doping or not. the clinic is simply a place where everyone can discuss doping without having to worry about the things you would at other forums.

 

[King Boonen]

Precisely. Because when it comes right down to it, I can never truly KNOW what any of these riders are up to. Even if I'm convinced they're all doping, I have no way of knowing who's program is the most expensive, advanced or effective.

If I suspect them to be "mostly" clean, I'll never know who may have bent the rules just a tiny bit (or more).

If they're all totally clean...well, then good for them. But EPO busts are still in the news, even as recently as today. So they're not ALL clean. That's the only thing I know with absolute certainty.

Yep, which is exactly why people like guys like Contador, who look great on a bike, race hard and are exciting. Most sensible people will come to the logical conclusion that it's likely all GT contenders are doping, so why not leave that to one side and support the person who animates the race.

I don't really support any particular riders, I obviously like Boonen and have been recently very impressed with Nibali, I just enjoy the racing, safe in the knowledge that it's likely they are all doping, selling positions, cutting deals to work for other teams etc. etc.


A fairly depressing view point could be that at least with Contador you already know he's a doper, so the discussion doesn't need to be had.

 

[Granville57]

that the clinic should be anti doping is a skybot argument used when they feel uncomfortable with sky getting more attention than other dopers.

In fairness though, those same sentiments have been expressed by others prior to the arrival of Sky. Although I would agree that there is truth in your statement as well. It just seems that some people assume that the Clinic is supposed to be anti-doping. Which it is not.

its up to each person if they want to be anti doping or not. the clinic is simply a place where everyone can discuss doping without having to worry about the things you would at other forums.

Thank you.

 

[BYOP88]

Yep, which is exactly why people like guys like Contador, who look great on a bike, race hard and are exciting. Most sensible people will come to the logical conclusion that it's likely all GT contenders are doping, so why not leave that to one side and support the person who animates the race.

I don't really support any particular riders, I obviously like Boonen and have been recently very impressed with Nibali, I just enjoy the racing, safe in the knowledge that it's likely they are all doping, selling positions, cutting deals to work for other teams etc. etc.


A fairly depressing view point could be that at least with Contador you already know he's a doper, so the discussion doesn't need to be had.

I agree with that.

 

[Samson777]

I have no way of knowing who's program is the most expensive, advanced or effective.

Watching the pace they set in the races, could be at least an indication

Even if I know nothing about what goes on behind the scenes, I bet Contadors program this year is if not more advanced, then for sure more effective than last season.

Of course I agree, that knowing how much is doping, and how much is talent is close to impossible. But still there are ways, to get ideas about how well the riders programs are working for them..

For the question about the clinic and anti doping. It is of course absurd, to expect something like this. In a internet forum, with anonymous posters, it's pure nonsense. Only if the moderators banned people, every time they expressed that they where not 100% against doping, it could perhaps be reality..
And no, that is not a suggestion.

 

[Granville57]

I just enjoy the racing, safe in the knowledge that it's likely they are all doping, selling positions, cutting deals to work for other teams etc. etc.

I agree as well. The bolded part being what only further distances me from the "truth" of any race. We know with absolute certainty that those things take place. So how much faith am I supposed to put in any of it?

Excitement, entertainment, and beautiful vistas. That's what keeps me watching.

That it may be rigged or dope-fueled is not something I can control.

But deals are made, and drugs are used. Fact.

I can separate that from the entertainment though. At least for shorts moments in time.

 

[Tonton]

I don''t think that the Clinic was meant to be pro or anti-doping but rather, at the time it was created, as a mean to push away from the "main" forum those who were arguing that LA was or wasn't doping. It has evolved as it became a general forum of its own, with different views on the subject, links/studies, and thoughts about much needed changes in cycling. The casual fan can still find the Professional Road Racing forum interesting and cheer for Piti achieving yet another podium at the Vuelta. And for some who believe that doping or not, there is somewhat of a level playing field and the best won, it's enough. For those a little more curious who wonder who the guy really is, they can come and check The Clinic out

 

[Dear Wiggo]

No .

 

[mewmewmew13]

It is certainly not my intention to single out OldCranky here. The same sentiments have been expressed by others in the past.

But I do wonder, is there a general sentiment that The Clinic should be anti-doping?

Is it considered by many to be "anti-doping by default," as suggested?

I've never seen it that way, and it seems the topic deserves its own thread.

you are

 

[mewmewmew13]

you can single me out as a member of the Official hmm hmm Pitchfork Crew

 

[blackcat]

its meta sport fandom

we support and defend the riders we luv, or teams we own (JV73)

and we vent against the dopers we hate.

Ricco is a gullible useful idiot who folx pot. I like Ricco myself.

I dont like Cav now neither. Nor have I any soft spot left for milquetoast froome-Dawg.

 

[Granville57]

Is The Clinic meant to be ANTI-doping?

No.

This meeting is adjourned.

 

[Afrank]

I don't really support any particular riders, I obviously like Boonen and have been recently very impressed with Nibali, I just enjoy the racing, safe in the knowledge that it's likely they are all doping, selling positions, cutting deals to work for other teams etc. etc.

Pretty much sums up my view of cycling. It's up to the individual whether they want to be completely anti-doping or support certain riders while also thinking that they are probably doping. The clinics just a means to discuss the doping.

For my part I wouldn't see the point of even following the sport if was going to be completely anti-doping and not support any rider I think is doping (which is most of the top ones IMO).

 

[msjett]

The clinic like any forum is a place to express your view on the subject, you can be anti or pro - doping, rider, team etc. And it means you can discuss the happenings of the race with your opinion of doping or not doping. Instead of having to pretend it doesn't happen, like you see in the regular area of the forum.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

The Clinic was created so that those of us who liked to question performances could do so outside of threads related to racing and other cycling topics. As much as I talked about doping, I definitely understood the reasoning.

Is it anti-doping? To some extent, but it is also much more realistic about it than many people are willing to admit.

Me, I've said many times that I am torn. I love cycling and watching cycling racing. At the same time, I don't like the way doping tilts the racing in ways that are not linear. But in some ways, I do bring the personality of a rider into the equation. I also take the personality of a riders panty sniffers into account. I don't really care what anyone thinks of that. I accepted long ago that there are two types of people in the world: 1. Those people who accept the fact that they will be hypocritical about many things. 2. People who lack the introspective skills to be in the first group.

Deal with it.

 

[mewmewmew13]

The Clinic was created so that those of us who liked to question performances could do so outside of threads related to racing and other cycling topics. As much as I talked about doping, I definitely understood the reasoning.

Is it anti-doping? To some extent, but it is also much more realistic about it than many people are willing to admit.

Me, I've said many times that I am torn. I love cycling and watching cycling racing. At the same time, I don't like the way doping tilts the racing in ways that are not linear. But in some ways, I do bring the personality of a rider into the equation. I also take the personality of a riders panty sniffers into account. I don't really care what anyone thinks of that. I accepted long ago that there are two types of people in the world: 1. Those people who accept the fact that they will be hypocritical about many things. 2. People who lack the introspective skills to be in the first group.

Deal with it.

good post Chewie
I agree..

 

[Energy Starr]

The Clinic was created so that those of us who liked to question performances could do so outside of threads related to racing and other cycling topics. As much as I talked about doping, I definitely understood the reasoning.

Is it anti-doping? To some extent, but it is also much more realistic about it than many people are willing to admit.

Me, I've said many times that I am torn. I love cycling and watching cycling racing. At the same time, I don't like the way doping tilts the racing in ways that are not linear. But in some ways, I do bring the personality of a rider into the equation. I also take the personality of a riders panty sniffers into account. I don't really care what anyone thinks of that. I accepted long ago that there are two types of people in the world: 1. Those people who accept the fact that they will be hypocritical about many things. 2. People who lack the introspective skills to be in the first group.

Deal with it.

I've been trying to think of a way to write how I feel for about 2 years now. I think you summed it up better than I could have myself. Thanks

 

[proffate]

The world is anti-doping, which is why they find the topic distasteful enough to shout down anyone who brings it up.

If the rest of the world weren't so anti-doping, there would be no need for the clinic to exist.

So I feel most clinicians are anti-doping, but no more than the average person. The main distinction is that clinicians have a stronger grasp of reality and a stronger stomach for uncomfortable topics.

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

If a lack of hypocrisy and full rationality were required to enjoy cycling, there wouldn't be any cycling fans. Or fans of any sport.

If you have no emotion, you cannot understand, much less enjoy watching a sport. And we all know how well emotion and rationality play.