Isn't doping inevitable?

[Lukenwolf]

Since there have been discussions about other kinds of sports in contrast to cycling and thinking about why cycling has the most dirty image of any sport, it got me thinking.

Is, what is asked of the riders, even realistically possible on pan y agua? Looking at a grand tour, I admit it sounds unlikely to me.

Does anyone know how to quantify the "effort" of a cyclist to - let's say - a marathon runner? A normal marathon for a fit and trained specialist is betweek 2h 10 minutes and 3 hours, while the average GT stage is somewhere in the 4h-6h ballpark. Now considering that a ridist on a GT stage doesn't go full pelt over these 4-6h, but still I'd think they don't spend that much less energy. So wouldn't that mean cyclists are supposed to deliver the equivalent of 20 marathons in little over 3 week? Heck, even if a stage amounts "only" to a half-marathon, it would still sound utterly superhuman.

Could it be that some cycling races would be nigh-on impossible without drugs?

 

[blackcat]

how about I pose this
is not doping inevitable
isn't doping inevitable.

can answer yes, and win on both counts. like the doperz

 

[cineteq]

Cheating is inevitable. Being doping or other means, it will always be there. It's just human.

 

[Wigwan]

No, you only go slower without drugs

 

[blackcat]

why would I put something in my body after all I have been through.

 

[Froome19]

Could it be that some cycling races would be nigh-on impossible without drugs?

No

Is doping inevitable?

Probably yes

 

[blackcat]

Probably yes

maybe no
how many fuggen characters

 

[Froome19]

Well I am not in a place where I can give a definite answer

Or if you like:

Imo Yes

 

[Lukenwolf]

No, you only go slower without drugs

That's what I mean. Wouldn't the last stages in a Grand Tour be ridiculously slow? I would imagine that, if you asked a marathon runner to do 20 competitive races in three weeks, that he might start out at something like 2:30 hours, but come the third week he'd maybe doing 3:50 or even 4h. Considering that there are hard mountain stages in the 3rd week of a big tour. Wouldn't those last something like 8 or 10 hours?

Just to make it clear. This isn't a "Marilize Legahuana" thread. I'm simply wondering whether some races are unrealistically demanding, more or less making PED's not only a matter of being competitive but also a "need to make it at all" thing.

 

[JimmyFingers]

No, you only go slower without drugs

This. I seem to remember reading about Jacques Anquetil saying the same thing

 

[romnom]

That's what I mean. Wouldn't the last stages in a Grand Tour be ridiculously slow? I would imagine that, if you asked a marathon runner to do 20 competitive races in three weeks, that he might start out at something like 2:30 hours, but come the third week he'd maybe doing 3:50 or even 4h. Considering that there are hard mountain stages in the 3rd week of a big tour. Wouldn't those last something like 8 or 10 hours?

Just to make it clear. This isn't a "Marilize Legahuana" thread. I'm simply wondering whether some races are unrealistically demanding, more or less making PED's not only a matter of being competitive but also a "need to make it at all" thing.

Aren't there ultra running races where they run ridiculous distances every day for more than a month? Well beyond regular marathons. No idea how their speed evolves during the races but I don't see why it would need to drop significantly. If it does, you did the earlier days too fast. No point starting with a 2:30 marathon if you know you have 19 more to go. Slow and steady wins the race and so on.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Since there have been discussions about other kinds of sports in contrast to cycling and thinking about why cycling has the most dirty image of any sport, it got me thinking.

Is, what is asked of the riders, even realistically possible on pan y agua? Looking at a grand tour, I admit it sounds unlikely to me.

Does anyone know how to quantify the "effort" of a cyclist to - let's say - a marathon runner? A normal marathon for a fit and trained specialist is betweek 2h 10 minutes and 3 hours, while the average GT stage is somewhere in the 4h-6h ballpark. Now considering that a ridist on a GT stage doesn't go full pelt over these 4-6h, but still I'd think they don't spend that much less energy. So wouldn't that mean cyclists are supposed to deliver the equivalent of 20 marathons in little over 3 week? Heck, even if a stage amounts "only" to a half-marathon, it would still sound utterly superhuman.

Could it be that some cycling races would be nigh-on impossible without drugs?

Doping is inevitable because there will always be those who attempt to gain an advantage.

That has nothing to do with courses or with a 3 week GT - if the magic drug plane that brought all the riders drugs for a year never made it then when the riders went to the line a bike race would break out.
It just would be somewhat slower, perhaps a bit more inconsistent. But it would not look any different to TV viewers.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Don't focus on the riders

Repetitive for some, but the focus on the athlete is wrong.

This is the UCI/IOC's problem first. If the bio-passport program wasn't an elaborate fraud, we wouldn't have 1/10th the doping.

Shortening bike racing events won't do what you think it will because the UCI will still be hiding positives. When a federation is not a fair dealer like the terrorists at the UCI, then sports fraud is the norm.

The distances in cycling are epic because it creates drama and still sells news.

Let WADA open cases on their own and performances will return to more human-scale. Will there still be doping? Yes. Back-dated testing would limit it to all but the most stupid. But, the IOC and UCI would never, ever do it. It would create too much scandal for too many years.

 

[howsteepisit]

Cheating is inevitable. Being doping or other means, it will always be there. It's just human.

Agree 100%. The more money there is in the sport, the greater the rewards of cheating are. The greater the reward, the more likely a cheater will appear. Plus, seems like there is also a strong motivation to win for the fame of winning. If cycling races had no prize for winning, no press for the winner would there still be cheating? I think so, some people just want to win.

 

[DirtyWorks]

Agree 100%. The more money there is in the sport, the greater Pat, Hein, and Alain's cut of the deal becomes.

Fixed that for you. The problem is at the UCI/IOC.

 

[Velodude]

Aren't there ultra running races where they run ridiculous distances every day for more than a month? Well beyond regular marathons. No idea how their speed evolves during the races but I don't see why it would need to drop significantly. If it does, you did the earlier days too fast. No point starting with a 2:30 marathon if you know you have 19 more to go. Slow and steady wins the race and so on.

Ultra runners don't run they shuffle.

Running is weight bearing and the bearing of the multiplied weight, pounding and extra consistent effort (no downhill respite or wheel sucking) places more stress on the muscles, immune system, heart, cells and DNA.

A competitor in a high level single marathon event is expected to immediately enter a structured 3 week recovery process after that 2-3 hour event.

I can recall years ago marathon runners were put in wheelchairs immediately after the event and were strongly urged not to compete in more than 1 marathon per 6 months.

Comparatively, cycling stage races are a walk in the park.

 

[Oldman]

Doping is inevitable because there will always be those who attempt to gain an advantage.

That has nothing to do with courses or with a 3 week GT - if the magic drug plane that brought all the riders drugs for a year never made it then when the riders went to the line a bike race would break out.
It just would be somewhat slower, perhaps a bit more inconsistent. But it would not look any different to TV viewers.

I like this. It happens every day a race happens where drug cheating doesn't occur.
Race strategy would change because there wouldn't be 7 guys from one team climbing like angels in the last week.

 

[del1962]

I actually don't buy into the meme that doing a grand tour is like 20 marathons, there is no drafting in a marathon and running such distances at elite pace puts incredible stresses on your body you don't get on a bike.

 

[blackcat]

Ultra runners don't run they shuffle.

Running is weight bearing and the bearing of the multiplied weight, pounding and extra consistent effort (no downhill respite or wheel sucking) places more stress on the muscles, immune system, heart, cells and DNA.

A competitor in a high level single marathon event is expected to immediately enter a structured 3 week recovery process after that 2-3 hour event.

I can recall years ago marathon runners were put in wheelchairs immediately after the event and were strongly urged not to compete in more than 1 marathon per 6 months.

Comparatively, cycling stage races are a walk in the park.

I thought it was one big race like Boston or Berlin or London per year.

That changed, and the money changed too, so some riders skip titles or worlds, think even olympics, for the dollars. Ofcourse, winning a title, brings you more cache and market value. But there is only one winner per title.

 

[thegripo]

a 2h05 marathon requires 8 wks recovery time just to start training hard again. and even then, elite marathoners at best are able to run 2 marathons in one year at that level. And EVEN THEN, they can't even hold that level for 2 years in a row.

recovery in cycling is totally different game.

anyways, i think it is possible to race a 3 wk stage race without doping, BUT not at current levels. IMO there's no way you can handle the training loads/intensity and recovery required to race current TDF stages at current paces.

remove doping and performance would change drastically.

 

[Dear Wiggo]

Marathon = running = pounding RBCs underheel.

Cycling = no (intentional) impact, so the damaging of RBCs effect at a minimum is reduced.

 

[ChewbaccaD]

Obvious answer to ridiculous question. If you didn't know the answer, notwithstanding the reasoning, before you posted, you're the only one who didn't.

 

[Lukenwolf]

a 2h05 marathon requires 8 wks recovery time just to start training hard again. and even then, elite marathoners at best are able to run 2 marathons in one year at that level. And EVEN THEN, they can't even hold that level for 2 years in a row.

recovery in cycling is totally different game.

anyways, i think it is possible to race a 3 wk stage race without doping, BUT not at current levels. IMO there's no way you can handle the training loads/intensity and recovery required to race current TDF stages at current paces.

remove doping and performance would change drastically.

Ok, so basically the initial flaw in my idea is that for the marathon runner the recovery is more needed for the stress put on the body (ankles, joints, feet etc) rather than the exhaustion.
The general consensus seems to be that without drugs people would simply go slower.

Ok, so let's do a simplified example:
Before the suspected start of EPO doping, the average speed of a tour was around 35/36 kph, and it went rapidly to and past the 40kph mark ever since. Allowing for advances in technology (Carbon instead of steel) lets forget everything above 40kph. That still means EPO increased the average speed by something like 5kph. Over the course of a typical tour (3.500 km) that would make a wooping 12.5 hours increase in riding time. But then we still have other things to consider

a) drugs like "the oil" which facilitate better/faster regeneration.
b) decreased regeneration time due to longer travel times.

I think with 'regeneration drugs' and other things like growth hormones taken out of the equation and factoring in that average speed would decrease over the tour due to less drug-optimized regeneration, I'd say another 2kph drop is warranted, leaving us at a 'pedestrian' 33kph. That would leave us at a racing time of 106 hours, 20 more than currently, which mean on average the riders would have one whole hour less recuperation time EVERY DAY.
Add to that that flat stages will be less affected by time increase as well as time trials, we could well look at 8-9h mountain stages, especially in the last week. That would hardly leave enough time to travel/regenerate etc. for the next stage, not even counting the fact that it will be a tough sell to have 6 hour live broadcasts.

So wouldn't a 'clean field' at least require a shortening of those mammoth mountain romps of 200+ kilometers?

 

[Frank Tuesday]

Is, what is asked of the riders, even realistically possible on pan y agua? Looking at a grand tour, I admit it sounds unlikely to me.

... Heck, even if a stage amounts "only" to a half-marathon, it would still sound utterly superhuman.

Could it be that some cycling races would be nigh-on impossible without drugs?

No one is asking them to do it on bread and water. They have trainers, dietician, cooks, doctors, coaches, etc. Is it possible to ride a GT without doping? Absolutely. Look at cross country charity rides. Every year, thousands of people ride across the USA @ 100 miles a day. They are fit, but they aren't all world class athletes.

Back to your original question, Is doping inevitable? Yes, but anytime you have something where a person can gain power, status or wealth, some people are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to gain the spoils. Education, politics, sport, marriage, business, etc. None are immune to the fallibility of humans.