• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Scott Tinley's take on FLandis

Apr 28, 2009
493
0
0
Visit site
that was an interesting read. thanks,

"If there is a smoking gun buried underneath all of this, either way, cycling and sport more broadly take another deep bruising for behavior that is rabidly, albeit implicitly, encouraged by the public at large. Bigger, faster, stronger, more violent--it all allows us to pimp more light beer, $250 athletic shoes, and car insurance through the rise and fall of real humans with already extraordinary abilities."
 
I've always liked Scott's writing too. He wrote many good stories in Triathlete mag over the years. This part stood out to me in the article:

"UCI, the organizers of the Tour de France, the cycling media, public and every commercial team or sponsor that has invested a single Euro into cycling has Floyd Landis' blood on their hands. He walks not alone."

So true.
 

Jimmy Riddle

BANNED
Jun 10, 2010
62
0
0
Visit site
BroDeal said:
Tinley forgot to write the Crayola version, so I guess you are sh!t outta luck.

It's one of those pieces where you pick out the lines that sort of agree with what you're saying and ignore the rest, and then claim it was really profound - when it wasn't really.
 
Apr 29, 2010
1,059
1
0
Visit site
"The whole affair is as lamentable as Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" anti-drug campaign of the late 80s. We live in a world that glamorizes tobacco, mythologizes the 60s experimentation, loads every beverage on 7 Eleven store shelves with legal amphetamines, introduces "responsible" social drinking to eight graders, and easily dispenses prescriptions for every physiological challenge from clinical depression to chronic flaccidity. And then we reward every sports hero with royalty status."

What are "legal amphetamines"? Caffeine ≠ amphetamine.

And who introduces 8th graders to social drinking besides 9th and 10th graders?
 
Apr 29, 2010
1,059
1
0
Visit site
Jimmy Riddle said:
It's one of those pieces where you pick out the lines that sort of agree with what you're saying and ignore the rest, and then claim it was really profound - when it wasn't really.

Yup. Summary of article: life is complicated and full of conflict. (j/k).

He uses too many cause and effect hypotheses for my taste. Well organized and good use of allegory though.
 

buckwheat

BANNED
Sep 24, 2009
1,852
0
0
Visit site
Jimmy Riddle said:
It's one of those pieces where you pick out the lines that sort of agree with what you're saying and ignore the rest, and then claim it was really profound - when it wasn't really.

Yeah, agree. Last line he used "conscious" instead of conscience. Illustrative of the confusion of the piece.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
Visit site
As always written by a man who has eaten to many Big Macs. This type of writing is bland and tri atheletes do not know cycling, sorry I ride with them. Great athletes yes honest yes cyclists no.
Cycling will never become popular as long as reporters like Scott keep presenting their IHOP pancake deal on cycling. Oh the humanity....
 

Joey_J

BANNED
Aug 1, 2009
99
0
0
Visit site
Jimmy Riddle said:
It's one of those pieces where you pick out the lines that sort of agree with....

Interesting that he wrote “Cycling wants to…put thirty years of substance abuse behind it in one clean swipe”

Tinley was 3rd in the Ironman in 81 and knows the truth about the doping scene in the 80’s.

Word on the street is the “collateral damage” from the LA investigation will bring new light to the truth about blood doping and EPO use in the 80’s
 
May 26, 2010
28,143
5
0
Visit site
Jimmy Riddle said:
It's one of those pieces where you pick out the lines that sort of agree with what you're saying and ignore the rest, and then claim it was really profound - when it wasn't really.

Fanboy Troll...
 
buckwheat said:
Last line he used "conscious" instead of conscience.

thought that was odd - either his editor is thick or I missed something with that one.

It did make me wonder though, why cheating is acceptable to people. I've never worked that one out. I've competed at international level before and knew there were people cheating at any chance they got - I've never worked out how you can stand on a podium knowing that you didn't win legitimately.
Perhaps children should be taught that cheating really isn't right - they get plenty of messed up teachings, so why not teach them something decent?
 
Rip:30 said:
"The whole affair is as lamentable as Nancy Reagan's "Just Say No" anti-drug campaign of the late 80s. We live in a world that glamorizes tobacco, mythologizes the 60s experimentation, loads every beverage on 7 Eleven store shelves with legal amphetamines, introduces "responsible" social drinking to eight graders, and easily dispenses prescriptions for every physiological challenge from clinical depression to chronic flaccidity. And then we reward every sports hero with royalty status."

What are "legal amphetamines"? Caffeine ≠ amphetamine.

Some of those "energy" pill packs you see on the counter at your local 7 Eleven contain substances that would cause a positive test. Not caffeine, but ephedrine types of substances.

One year at Nevada City, the race packet included some liquid energy packs. The chief official in his race instructions told us not to use them as they could lead to a positive drug test.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that there is plenty of easily available stuff that is not advertised as a "drug" that an unwary athlete could take that they shouldn't. I think that is what the original poster was talking about.

Kevin
 
Apr 29, 2010
1,059
1
0
Visit site
nslckevin said:
Some of those "energy" pill packs you see on the counter at your local 7 Eleven contain substances that would cause a positive test. Not caffeine, but ephedrine types of substances.

One year at Nevada City, the race packet included some liquid energy packs. The chief official in his race instructions told us not to use them as they could lead to a positive drug test.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that there is plenty of easily available stuff that is not advertised as a "drug" that an unwary athlete could take that they shouldn't. I think that is what the original poster was talking about.

Kevin

Ephedra has been banned in the US since 2004. Ephedra is also not an amphetamine.

The quote about amphetamines being sold in 7 elevens came from the article and was used as part of a description of life outside of sports. I think it's untrue and over the top.