Of Doping, and Hanging onto Cars

Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
The main forum is really funny. The comments about Cavendish are eerily similar to the words of a certain man from Texas by the name of...

"Where's the proof" sounds pretty similar to "I've never tested positive" in my book. The parallels are really striking, actually. As is the way enforcement of the rules is so capricious.

During the ToCali, it became readily apparent to me that many Euros simply don't believe UCI races should be raced, and that it's all theater. The nonsense of this year's tour just confirm what I've already learned. So it's funny to me that people see this as the 'pinnacle of the sport'.

Even the apologists have the same retorts: "they're just bitter", "they should focus on their own racing", blah, blah... I must say, it's funny to watch human nature in action.
 
Jul 23, 2009
2,891
0
0
Oh good, so I'm not the only one shaking my noggin. 13 usually has good things to say so I was really puzzled.

OT*: So what's the significance of the wee Scotty dog Dim?

* at least I think it's OT
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
pedaling squares said:
Oh good, so I'm not the only one shaking my noggin. 13 usually has good things to say so I was really puzzled.

OT*: So what's the significance of the wee Scotty dog Dim?

* at least I think it's OT
Its a Skye Terrier called erm, Skye. Tsf logo and mascot type thingy.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
thirteen said:
i think i understand and i think i agree, but i'll keep my mouth shut and let 131313 explain :eek:
No go ahead, explain, we cant wait until 131313 turns up to explain to us.
 
It's not comparable. "Where's the evidence?" is a perfectly valid question to ask about the Cavendish situation, because obtaining it should be, in theory, much easier than in Armstrong's case, and also because in the case of Armstrong we actually have the evidence in front of our eyes. We need to see Cavendish's times up the climbs, pictures and stuff like that. Should be easy. I remember reading that Jimmy Casper once was among the 30 fastest riders in a MTF, and he barely made it within the time limit.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
i think what he meant to say is that cycling is like life, which, in turn, has previously been claimed to be like a box of chocolates.
As a consequence, in cycling, one never knows what one's going to get.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
TeamSkyFans said:
Sorry, what point are you making?
that despite a lot of posturing, and a lot of words and money spend to give the illusion of 'clean sport', the organizers and officials have zero interest in fairly enforcing the rules.

I knew this, of course, but I was silly enough to think that possibly things could get better.
 
"Never tested positive" is a statement, carefully worded, which opens up the possibility of doping without being caught. It is a response to pieces of evidence, no matter how circumstancial, being shown. This is how Armstrong usually answered critics when faced with evidence against him.

"Where's the proof?" is a question, requesting that evidence (which is already shown and being answered to in the Armstrong quote) be placed on the table. Cavendish shouldn't have to answer the critics until they present him with evidence to answer to.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
hrotha said:
It's not comparable. "Where's the evidence?" is a perfectly valid question to ask about the Cavendish situation, because obtaining it should be, in theory, much easier than in Armstrong's case, and also because in the case of Armstrong we actually have the evidence in front of our eyes. We need to see Cavendish's times up the climbs, pictures and stuff like that. Should be easy. I remember reading that Jimmy Casper once was among the 30 fastest riders in a MTF, and he barely made it within the time limit.
The guy rode one of the Giro climbs faster than Contador. I mean, I guess anything is possible. And there's no proof...

guys stop hanging onto cars when the TV cameras come by, and things are much more broken up that people realize. The team cars know where the cameras are, so it's really not that hard to make sure you don't get caught. Easier than passing a doping test. And similar, in my mind.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Cavendish shouldn't have to answer the critics until they present him with evidence to answer to.
When the race organizers have no interest in enforcing the rules, I'm not going to hold my breath for "proof".

"Pescheux dismissed the accusations, saying to the Independent newspaper: 'Rojas always looking for excuses to win. I have no problems with Cavendish.' "
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
1
0
On vicious circles, and how revolutions are needed to break them

131313 said:
that despite a lot of posturing, and a lot of words and money spend to give the illusion of 'clean sport', the organizers and officials have zero interest in fairly enforcing the rules.

I knew this, of course, but I was silly enough to think that possibly things could get better.

A big problem is that doping is and always has been the norm in cycling.
each single individual's attempt at cleaning up cycling is thus considered an act of breaking the norm.

Breaking the norm, in turn, is generally punished. This happens not only in normal society (e.g. the norm is to not steel, so if you steel you go to jail), but also in cycling: since the norm is to dope, those who don't play along are punished. Floyd and other whistleblowers can testify to this.

Now, the public punishment of such acts of breaking the norm, in turn, generally leads to a reinforcement of the norm.
So what we've seen over the past few decades, with whistleblowers (e.g. Floyd) or non-dopers (e.g. Bassons) being outcasted and all, has led to a huge reinforcement of the norm (read: doping) in cycling.

In other words, doping is, has been, and will continue to be the norm in cycling, unless people from within join hands and revolt.

Really, Kimmage was right when he said that what cycling needs is a revolution.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
131313 said:
The main forum is really funny. The comments about Cavendish are eerily similar to the words of a certain man from Texas by the name of...

"Where's the proof" sounds pretty similar to "I've never tested positive" in my book. The parallels are really striking, actually. As is the way enforcement of the rules is so capricious.
Some people are adamant the Loch Ness monster exists. Others are sceptical and say 'where's the proof'. By your logic, you think this second group are in the wrong.
 
Feb 1, 2011
147
0
0
131313 said:
that despite a lot of posturing, and a lot of words and money spend to give the illusion of 'clean sport', the organizers and officials have zero interest in fairly enforcing the rules.

I knew this, of course, but I was silly enough to think that possibly things could get better.
Agreed that the enforcement of some rules is arbitrary at best. There's been some egregious motor pacing this year and I can well believe that there's a some hanging on in amongst the stragglers. Apparently there are fines for such things, but I should think that docking points from the sprinters would be a better deterrent. The tour organizers don't seem bothered. They like having the sprinters there to provide a spectacle during transitional stage. A more honest way of course would be just to extend the time limits, but that would cause logistics issues. In the end they feel it's best to just turn a blind eye.

For my part, I don't have the same respect for sprinters as GC men and classics specialists. I've never given a sprint win the same value as a mountain win or even an escape win. Whether or not sprinters hang on to cars on mountain stages doesn't really affect my opinion of them one way or another.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,225
0
0
Mambo95 said:
Some people are adamant the Loch Ness monster exists. Others are sceptical and say 'where's the proof'. By your logic, you think this second group are in the wrong.
Cav holding onto cars on a par with the Loch Ness monster. Got it.

He put 36 minutes into Graeme Brown and McEwen up Mt Etna, estimated time around 48 minutes. I'll try to dig up the link/guessitmations.
 
Mar 11, 2009
5,841
1
0
This is the Tour de France, there are fans on every kilometer of every climb and I bet at least 50% of them have cameras or camera phones. There is just no way that Cavendish could spend more than a few seconds hanging on to a team car without pictures being taken.
 
Mambo95 said:
Some people are adamant the Loch Ness monster exists. Others are sceptical and say 'where's the proof'. By your logic, you think this second group are in the wrong.
That's a very poor analogy to make.

I think what s/he's saying is that the proof that Cavendish hangs onto cars for dear life already exists, but is being ignored.
 
Jul 2, 2009
2,394
0
0
the delgados said:
That's a very poor analogy to make.

I think what s/he's saying is that the proof that Cavendish hangs onto cars for dear life already exists, but is being ignored.
No it's not, it's just the daft logic taken to an extreme.

Why shouldn't people ask for proof of something? Or are we all expected to believe everything we are told?
 
Aug 29, 2010
298
0
0
131313 said:
The team cars know where the cameras are, so it's really not that hard to make sure you don't get caught. Easier than passing a doping test. And similar, in my mind.
But the photographers on the camera bikes can go anywhere in the convoy can't they? How much would a load of shots of Cavendish cheating get a photographer compared to shots of the finish which any number of photographers would get. So if it was happening a photographer would be well worth just sitting following Cavendish, and if he was suddenly 10minutes outside the timelimit because he couldn't then it would also be quite a giveaway.
 
Jul 3, 2011
199
0
0
Should be easily proved with the times up the mountains - I can see maybe leaning on to the team car for a brief "chat" every now and then for a bit of a rest, they all do it........but hanging on for minutes at a time? Nah - a lot of other riders would have seen it as would spectators etc etc. The Tour just has too much media coverage, too many people on the roads, officials, riders, support staff etc etc to witness this.
Plus the tour officials do have the data, they would have asked other riders - they cleared Cav so I guess that's good enough.

I can see it happening in less covered rides in other races, I'm not saying he's beyond reproach just that he would have been caught here IMO.
 
Oct 16, 2009
3,868
0
0
They should put a TV moto on Cav for the Alpe d'Huez stage and stream the footage live on letour.fr. If he then makes it through that stage within the time cut he can make it through anything.
 
Jun 21, 2011
322
0
0
As has been pointed out holding onto a car and successfully doping are very,very different. If there is evidence it hasn't been ignored, it simply hasn't been highlighted. However, I doubt there is any actual evidence or accurate times of Cavendish and others climbing Mt. Etna because a journalist would've written that article.

There is circumstantial evidence that he held onto a car on Mt Etna. There is that photo of Chicchi holding onto the Quickstep car with several other riders and if they needed help then logically so would Cavendish but if the complaints are only directed at Cavendish and not the riders where actual evidence exists then that's creating double standards which those complaining (generally) are accusing the organisers of doing.

However, there is nothing to indicate Cavendish has held onto a car in this tour. There's been an accusation by Movistar and Tyler Farrar simply said he was surprised a guy could win after being dropped 70km from the finish. The question here is whether he was genuinely dropped or did he set his own pace up the climbs knowing that the HTC train could pull back the autobus before the final climb, leaving him fresh enough to stay with the autobus up Plateau d'Beille? The latter is an acceptable explanation for me.

If Cavendish does hold onto a car for an extended period of time it'll be all over L'Equipe the next day.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY