- Jul 10, 2010
roundabout said:Any particular reason for this confidence? Because I believe that there is at least 1 rider on Garmin currently who may be able to get better results elsewhere. Or at the very least that rider has a very low chance of getting to the previous level relative to the opposition while at Garmin.
Is the sport cleaner to the point that gains from doping are balanced by better team structures, training etc so there's less incentive to cheat? Is the testing stringent enough that doping is unlikely to happen? Does the mumbo jumbo hypnosis about not doping again work? *wink-wink* about the last one.
The cynic in me however thinks that he is just running a bit scared because of recent developments that had little to do with people within cycling.
He is certainly a rider that I am following with interest as an indirect indicator of what is going on.
Wow - I missed a lot when I stopped reading this thread! Tons of great new posts!
JV - I have no questions for ya. Just keep doing what you are doing. I think it's going in the right direction.
Roundabout - it might be a bit picky - but the incentive does not decrease. The RISK INCREASES. This is an important difference. Well, wait a sec, I'm going to argue with myself here. I'm used to trying to put things into economic terms - like payoff and risk. The payoff - winning or doing well - will never decrease. However, incentives could include peer pressure to conform, like a team-mate telling you you had to do this or you wouldn't be long with the team. With an increase in risk, you will decrease the likelihood that team-mate would do that. And, you would simultaneously increase the likelihood that you could not conform and get away with it. All of which could come under "incentives".
Anyway, good conversations.