Is there anything new in pro cycling besides doping & LA?

[BroDeal]

Is BigBoat really a robot?

Every post seems to be exactly(more or less) the same, even his post on the Simeoni thread. Not saying he is wrong on his opinions but whats the point of repeating the exact same thing time after time. Doping with their own blood, performance value testing, all doing it etc, etc.

OMG, I even remember his posts of the top of my head. I have read it so many times, I would like to hear something constructive being offered even if I dont agree or if its just to point out cycling is dirty, why does Big Boat bother following the post at all.

Not a robot, just a troll. You left out the part about size 21 needles and how no one who is clean could have finished.

It looks like Big Boat and Quarterpounder sometimes engage in tag team trolling. Are they they same person? One of those two guys (or both) is the notorious Tom Morris, cycling troll extraordinaire.

 

[tifosa]

Prolific posters (with little in the way of new or even semi-original content) and cyber "pot stirrers" both have an element of troll about them, don't they?

Ignore them. When they no longer have audience participation, they will find another site to inhabit and other new targets to engage. Maybe they will find a new favorite sport. Maybe, just maybe, they will actually buy a bicycle and ride it. Personally, for the amount of time some appear to spend at their computer, I doubt they have an actual interest in fitness of any kind.

 

[BroDeal]

Ignore them. When they no longer have audience participation, they will find another site to inhabit and other new targets to engage.

Not true. Tom Morris has been trolling cyclingforums for years. Even though he is banned there, a bug in the software allows him to make posts that no one can see but which cause threads to move to the top of active threads. He has spent the last eight months making thousands of posts that are invisible to disrupt the forum.

True trolls have mental problems that go beyond enjoyment of getting a rise out of people. Usenet is full of trolls that are still going strong ten years or more after they started. Look up Mike Vandeman, the bane of any group remotely about mountain biking, some time.

 

[tifosa]

No. Not true for you.

 

[BroDeal]

No. Not true for you.

Truth is truth. It does not matter whether someone chooses to believe it.

Maybe you could explain why trolls will just go away despite evidence to the contrary that exists on every forum on the Internet.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I actually don't think BigBoat is a bot or troll, as he does have a lot of factual information in his posts. But why they are all pegged 100% to the negative is beyond me. It's a shame he can't use his knowledge a little more constructively.

 

[Boofhead]

Pro cycling is damaged by doping scandals and all on the circuit bear the stain by association, guilty or not. While we rely on self-endorsement and a hit and miss testing regime to root out cheats we the fans are left to wonder. I employ skepticism to avoid unbridled wonder at superhuman performance (Ricco for example) against being duped by cheats. Unfortunately any “clean” riders are swept up by association with the cheats, a tragedy for the sport.

I am unable to suspend belief and wholeheartedly embrace Pro Cycling as credible while this cloud of doubt hangs over the sport. I dislike being taken for a fool. Further I find the discussion on doping in this forum and others compelling if disturbing yet see little discussion of ways to address this problem.

Perhaps we need to forget about the current crop of pros and consider some succession planning, that is, establish protocols, a portfolio, a means to enable junior athletes, not just cyclists to establish a valid history of their parameters, biological and physical whereby innocence can be unequivocally be established.

This “portfolio” may take the form of the current “Biological Passport” in addition to a bank of samples (blood, urine…) in secure, independent, multiple, storage to be available for testing if and when questions arise.

As an athlete comes to the attention of his/her national association, that is, a state or national junior title then this process would be engaged. No testing need apply to the samples taken at this point and may never, testing is an option when answers are required when suspicions surface.

Economies of scale keep costs manageable and in time will be seen as another expense along with the multitude of others to keep an athlete involved, healthy and competitive.

This suggestion does nothing to address current athletes reputations and does not seek to, cast them loose, enjoy them for what they are, fabulous but potentially flawed and in five to ten years perhaps we can begin to believe again. Then I can again leap off the couch when a future Ben Johnson wins the Olympic 100 meters in world record time or the next Lance glances disdainfully over his shoulder at his contemporaries before blowing them away. It will be worth the wait.

 

[bikepure]

the doping thing is because (i think) we are passionate about our sport and want to see it crawl out of the shadows.

the lord pharmastrong because he is a media *****. he creates a story daily with his ****ter musings. the astana team folding is just the last in a sea of actions to keep him front page. the deal was done with TREK/SRAM before the TOC.

 

[LugHugger]

on thread, with today's news about blokhaus, i'm afraid that the answer is no. it seems to me that the sport is in a self-perpetuating downward spiral. i'm finding it increasingly hard to justify any interest in pro cycling. i'm off to ride my bike.