Should Contador retain his 2010 Tour Victory

[jae2460]

He finished le Tour in the shortest time - so he is the winner.

Difference to rivals is that he was caught and that Cologne-lab was so accurate.

Doesn't matter if he "finished le Tour in the shortest time", he didn't follow the rules he agreed to before lining up for the start. He doped. If he was riding a motorcycle would he still be given the trophy under your logic?

 

[danjo007]

Contador should lose the title as well as face a longer ban. He is a MORON.

wow - took the words right out of my mouth

 

[Bike Boy]

As any obstacle on the road, the dope test is a part of the game. If you fail you lose. Andy must be the winner. It's insane but as long as the top guys continue on their programs, this is the only solution.

As any wise man would suggest, if you want to fight doping, fight the dirty network. testing the athletes will always be essential, but it wont solve the problem.

 

[ferryman]

As any obstacle on the road, the dope test is a part of the game. If you fail you lose. Andy must be the winner. It's insane but as long as the top guys continue on their programs, this is the only solution.

As any wise man would suggest, if you want to fight doping, fight the dirty network. testing the athletes will always be essential, but it wont solve the problem.

I agree with this but decided to vote 'no winner' just on the basis it could send out some message. Still Pi**in in the wind though I know.

 

[Anonymous]

If he was riding a motorcycle would he still be given the trophy under your logic?

Why not? we let cancellara keep his flanders and roubaix wins

 

[scribe]

Those voting for Contador keeping his tour win reads like a who's who list of hippocrates.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Those voting for Contador keeping his tour win reads like a who's who list of hippocrates.

They took an oath.

 

[patricknd]

They took an oath.

good one

can't we just say that everyone who competed is the winner?

 

[Hugh Januss]

From somebody whos been to paris six times I would disagree. The chance to cheer on ALL the riders who complete the tour is a great occasion. Even if it was reduced to a shambles this year by someones antics.

Dim - Proud recipient of a middle finger from the radioshack team car in Paris

Is that the "antic" you are talking about?

 

[nowhereman]

let him keep it, but ban him for the rest of his life.
as Kimmage said, this guy has really been insulting our intelligence.

I'd feel sorry for you, but it would be a waste of time

 

[Hugh Januss]

good one

can't we just say that everyone who competed is the winner?

Little League rules?

 

[patricknd]

Little League rules?

seems fitting

 

[The Hitch]

Those voting for Contador keeping his tour win reads like a who's who list of hippocrates.

Why would voting for Contador make me a hypocrite? I would prefer Contador as the tdf champion so i voted for him.

i do not accept the authority of the UCI on this since they are corrupt and not fighting it properly. I follow my own terms. ANdrew is clearly doped too, and i believe so are the rest of the top 10 so i dont care how what the UCI says on the matter, to me it would be wrong to take it away from AC.

Those are the terms i choose. I would be saying the same if Andrew had been able to steal an extra few minutes from Contador on stage 3 and won instead.

So where is the hypocrisy?

 

[MarkvW]

From somebody whos been to paris six times I would disagree. The chance to cheer on ALL the riders who complete the tour is a great occasion. Even if it was reduced to a shambles this year by someones antics.

Maybe more last day time trials would be a good compromise.

 

[Paco_P]

Sure he should. In a field of dopers, he won.

 

[Captain_Cavman]

Sure he should. In a field of dopers, he won.

And in the field of dopers who didn't get caught, he came nowhere.

Schleck gets it. You don't always get what you deserve.

 

[Roland Rat]

I voted for no winner, but thinking about it I should have voted "Other".

The "Other" being "WGAF because TdF history has meant nothing since 1991."

Seriously, I wish 1991-2010 records could be in italics and known as "the biochemical doping years". They mean nothing.

 

[barn yard]

dont care, the tour is the most boring major race of the year every year without fail

 

[python]

because i'm obsessed with intellectual consistency, if i said yes, i'd have to acknowledge texas too...i simply can not fall this low D) and therefore it's easier to abstain.

 

[Benotti69]

Who cares? It's over and done with!

Let ASO do whatever they want. My interest in the race terminated sometime during that stupid processional into Paris.

Ending that stupid last day processional is something to care about!

i agree prefer they race the last day, but if it means a shorter TdF by one day so be it.

 

[Benotti69]

I voted for no winner, but thinking about it I should have voted "Other".

The "Other" being "WGAF because TdF history has meant nothing since 1991."

Seriously, I wish 1991-2010 records could be in italics and known as "the biochemical doping years". They mean nothing.

is 2010 the last year? i doubt it, but understand that 2011 has yet to proven.

and sure you meant " the UCI unofficially sanctioned biochemical doping years"

 

[R.0.t.O]

I voted for no winner, but thinking about it I should have voted "Other".

The "Other" being "WGAF because TdF history has meant nothing since 1991."

Seriously, I wish 1991-2010 records could be in italics and known as "the biochemical doping years". They mean nothing.

+1. It's a nonsense to declare Schleck the winner, what would that even mean? How many Tours de France will Jan Ullrich have on his palmares by this logic, would anyone ever propose giving him 2000, 2001 and 2003 or will that be conveniently forgotten about like 1996?

 

[Anonymous]

Is that the "antic" you are talking about?

i have signatures disabled. Id forgotten thats even in mine.

 

[Francois the Postman]

"Should" in reality? Whatever the rules say goes for the paper trail.

"Should" for me? You can't rerun the race that would have had utterly different dynamics, and reshuffling has become so common place, even with only half our eyes open, that I kinda stopped caring.

In general, I wished that if a podium spot becomes available through retroactive elimination, people should indeed move up a spot, but only if they can pass the exact same level of tests that triggered the elimination.

If they can, brilliant. If they can't, even if it is through no fault of the rider, say because we simply don't have the same amount of test samples left, or worse, any samples at all, than the spot should remain open.

With the fairly ad-hoc testing procedures we have in place, it is a mockery to eliminate and vilify the one you did scrutinize, but glorify the one that simply missed (most of the) testing points, and wasn't put under the same microscope.

I guess that makes me an "other". Option 2 or 3 depending on the above.

 

[EmpressJo]

Strip him and no winner.

Much as Baby Schleck would like a TDF to his name, I don't think anyone - him included - would want to see him have one/won like this.