- Mar 13, 2009
- 16,854
- 2
- 0
Ignoring postives from the protected guys in the short term means in long term, the sport is compromised. Doping is an exponential externality. It is not worth to see no evil and give a pass to Armstrong, and dine on corporate America, because they disappear with the golden calf. You need sustainable growth. Doping expediency, is short term gain, for long term pain.
Cycling is in a unique position, it has GT's that go for three weeks, where the authorities could supervise teams, like the Japanese keirin carnival operations, where they sequester riders. This is to protect the gambling integrity on which the sport is based. But no other sport that has such a doping problem as cycling, has the advantage of potentially able to remove the doctors and soigneurs, over the most important event, in prestige and economic terms, and prevent the riders doping over the event. Weightlifting, NFL, MLB, T&F, Nordic skiing, all can suffer from the Rasmussen phenomenon, where riders (see: athletes) are left to their own devices.
If you quarantine all riders, for three weeks, and even better, four weeks, bring them in a week early for testing and keep them at the Grande Depart. So, no 30 injections per stage, no insulin, no testo, no blood refills, no recovery doping, euphemistically known as recovery therapy.
The UCI can do this, and institute an inverted Red Queen effect. If the recovery doping is prohibited because the logistics are not possible, and you have a a total body hemoglobin test, then perhaps, perhaps then, you will have a clean winner.
But, I have not seen nor heard, of Vaughters pursuing such a Machiavellian play on the ASO and UCI, to institute this. The UCI spent 5.3 million euro last year, on the blood passports, that really do nothing, and just create a barrier to entry, for those with less resources to purchase the sophisticated expertise of the Ferrari types.
NB. If JV was pursuing such a Machiavellian play, I should NOT have heard, he would be doing it quiet, and behind the scenes. But, the performances of Wiggins and Vande Velde, would compromise him in executing such a strategy, because they do not come across as credible for the status quo.
If I was JV: I would whip Vande Velde, and Wiggins into shape, and tell them in no uncertain terms, they are not going to dope, but I will work on this strategy, to institute a Tour, where every rider is supervised by security for the 3 (hopefully 4) weeks. And this would be the level playing field he could work towards. As it is, it is a pretty $hitty pact, "oh be clean guys, suffer in the gruppetto, get your two years on minimum, then we will find the next greatest talent for your spot after you never cracked the A team". That is not palatable to the alpha.
So, where is the macro strategy of Vaughters? Where is his play on restricting the gains of Contador and Armstrong. He has worked on the micro, the internal program to get the gains in the wind tunnel, and allocating resources to the TTT where you can see definite gains from your investment. JV would say he is investing in the blood passport, and that is his macro contribution.
Nup, does not cut it. The blood passport is an expensive waste.
If I was the UCI I would invest that 5.3 million euro, into supervision of the 3 GTs. I think they would cost around 2 million euro per GT.
If you can possibly create a clean winner at the Tour, via 2 means, a total hemoglobin test, plus a 198 rider supervision 24/7 intra-tour, then this will be one massive inverted Red Queen effect. It could even open the monuments to the possibility of winning clean.
This is what you have to pursue JV. Quit the bs about the Tour and it can be won clean. Work towards that goal, on a macro and political level. Do not kid yourself, and us, that is will occur in this current dynamic.
Get the recovery drugs out. Get the hemoglobin to natural start level. A smart politician can do this. No one thinks JV is stupid, if anyone can do it, you probably could. There are few, if any, who have the motivation to pursue this strategy.
It has to be wiser, to allocate that blood passport money, to a more potent program. I know most riders, and even most riders who are doping, would prefer to ride clean, if it was an even playing field. There are only a few draggers, like Armstrong, who wish to get an advantage with their medical program.
A smart politican will build the constiuencies, to get this done. The French will want a Tour winner, but even with their (mega-charged) swim sprint team, they are reticent to really pull the trigger on a big time medical program. Moreau in 2007 was the last guy to show some spark, and if he had a big time program, he probably could have got on the podium. Big time program avec the recovery 30 injections.
So the French are the first constituency. Build via the paths of least resistance, and keep building. The ASO would love to present to their nation a French Tour winner. This is how they will do it. There are no riders now, no espoirs or under 25 riders, Rolland, di Gregorio, Coppell, they are not quite Tour calibre winners. And Roman Feillu's brother is a solid journeyman, nothing more. I may be underselling Rolland.
Get Wiggins and Vande Velde to ride clean, because you need the credibility. Then present this model to the UCI and ASO. This should have a definite trickle down effect. I would love to see the Schlecks go backwards faster than the Maginot line. Wipe that smug look of their faces.
My solution is macro and political. Hurt Armstrong via enforcement of the prohibition of the recovery programs. Wiggins and Vande Velde would be for that, as Steffan is not pulling out a bag of tricks with insulin and 29 other doses working on the CNS and cardiac and blood system. And even tho Wiggins crit rose, I doubt he and Vande Velde have rolled the dice on intra-tour transfusion refills. Perhaps just some O2 drug micro-dosing. So, no refills to Armstrong, Contador, the Schlecks and other GT competitors, then relatively, that is one big advantage for Wiggins and Vande Velde correct?
Gotta be smarter than the rest. And that intelligence is not Bruyneel planning logistics for the blood transfusions with refrigerated panniers.
There is always gonna be doping. But there is a solution, to minimise the doping gains. Prevent riders getting the mammoth gains, where clean riders cannot compete with. It can be done. Why invest 5.3 million euro in a PR gambit like the blood passport when you can make genuine inroads.
The civil liberty argument does not hold water, the civil liberties of clean riders trump the doperz, plus riding a GT is an invitational and privilege and riders can opt out, if they feel their human liberty is being compromised by 24/7 supervision thru the 3 weeks.
Cycling is in a unique position, it has GT's that go for three weeks, where the authorities could supervise teams, like the Japanese keirin carnival operations, where they sequester riders. This is to protect the gambling integrity on which the sport is based. But no other sport that has such a doping problem as cycling, has the advantage of potentially able to remove the doctors and soigneurs, over the most important event, in prestige and economic terms, and prevent the riders doping over the event. Weightlifting, NFL, MLB, T&F, Nordic skiing, all can suffer from the Rasmussen phenomenon, where riders (see: athletes) are left to their own devices.
If you quarantine all riders, for three weeks, and even better, four weeks, bring them in a week early for testing and keep them at the Grande Depart. So, no 30 injections per stage, no insulin, no testo, no blood refills, no recovery doping, euphemistically known as recovery therapy.
The UCI can do this, and institute an inverted Red Queen effect. If the recovery doping is prohibited because the logistics are not possible, and you have a a total body hemoglobin test, then perhaps, perhaps then, you will have a clean winner.
But, I have not seen nor heard, of Vaughters pursuing such a Machiavellian play on the ASO and UCI, to institute this. The UCI spent 5.3 million euro last year, on the blood passports, that really do nothing, and just create a barrier to entry, for those with less resources to purchase the sophisticated expertise of the Ferrari types.
NB. If JV was pursuing such a Machiavellian play, I should NOT have heard, he would be doing it quiet, and behind the scenes. But, the performances of Wiggins and Vande Velde, would compromise him in executing such a strategy, because they do not come across as credible for the status quo.
If I was JV: I would whip Vande Velde, and Wiggins into shape, and tell them in no uncertain terms, they are not going to dope, but I will work on this strategy, to institute a Tour, where every rider is supervised by security for the 3 (hopefully 4) weeks. And this would be the level playing field he could work towards. As it is, it is a pretty $hitty pact, "oh be clean guys, suffer in the gruppetto, get your two years on minimum, then we will find the next greatest talent for your spot after you never cracked the A team". That is not palatable to the alpha.
So, where is the macro strategy of Vaughters? Where is his play on restricting the gains of Contador and Armstrong. He has worked on the micro, the internal program to get the gains in the wind tunnel, and allocating resources to the TTT where you can see definite gains from your investment. JV would say he is investing in the blood passport, and that is his macro contribution.
Nup, does not cut it. The blood passport is an expensive waste.
If I was the UCI I would invest that 5.3 million euro, into supervision of the 3 GTs. I think they would cost around 2 million euro per GT.
If you can possibly create a clean winner at the Tour, via 2 means, a total hemoglobin test, plus a 198 rider supervision 24/7 intra-tour, then this will be one massive inverted Red Queen effect. It could even open the monuments to the possibility of winning clean.
This is what you have to pursue JV. Quit the bs about the Tour and it can be won clean. Work towards that goal, on a macro and political level. Do not kid yourself, and us, that is will occur in this current dynamic.
Get the recovery drugs out. Get the hemoglobin to natural start level. A smart politician can do this. No one thinks JV is stupid, if anyone can do it, you probably could. There are few, if any, who have the motivation to pursue this strategy.
It has to be wiser, to allocate that blood passport money, to a more potent program. I know most riders, and even most riders who are doping, would prefer to ride clean, if it was an even playing field. There are only a few draggers, like Armstrong, who wish to get an advantage with their medical program.
A smart politican will build the constiuencies, to get this done. The French will want a Tour winner, but even with their (mega-charged) swim sprint team, they are reticent to really pull the trigger on a big time medical program. Moreau in 2007 was the last guy to show some spark, and if he had a big time program, he probably could have got on the podium. Big time program avec the recovery 30 injections.
So the French are the first constituency. Build via the paths of least resistance, and keep building. The ASO would love to present to their nation a French Tour winner. This is how they will do it. There are no riders now, no espoirs or under 25 riders, Rolland, di Gregorio, Coppell, they are not quite Tour calibre winners. And Roman Feillu's brother is a solid journeyman, nothing more. I may be underselling Rolland.
Get Wiggins and Vande Velde to ride clean, because you need the credibility. Then present this model to the UCI and ASO. This should have a definite trickle down effect. I would love to see the Schlecks go backwards faster than the Maginot line. Wipe that smug look of their faces.
My solution is macro and political. Hurt Armstrong via enforcement of the prohibition of the recovery programs. Wiggins and Vande Velde would be for that, as Steffan is not pulling out a bag of tricks with insulin and 29 other doses working on the CNS and cardiac and blood system. And even tho Wiggins crit rose, I doubt he and Vande Velde have rolled the dice on intra-tour transfusion refills. Perhaps just some O2 drug micro-dosing. So, no refills to Armstrong, Contador, the Schlecks and other GT competitors, then relatively, that is one big advantage for Wiggins and Vande Velde correct?
Gotta be smarter than the rest. And that intelligence is not Bruyneel planning logistics for the blood transfusions with refrigerated panniers.
There is always gonna be doping. But there is a solution, to minimise the doping gains. Prevent riders getting the mammoth gains, where clean riders cannot compete with. It can be done. Why invest 5.3 million euro in a PR gambit like the blood passport when you can make genuine inroads.
The civil liberty argument does not hold water, the civil liberties of clean riders trump the doperz, plus riding a GT is an invitational and privilege and riders can opt out, if they feel their human liberty is being compromised by 24/7 supervision thru the 3 weeks.