So where to from here?

[thehog]

So where does cycling go to from here? McQuaid and co. have bunkered down and waiting for the winds to pass but for cycling fans what to do?

The results from the last 20 years are now null. I'm not sure how anyone pieces it together or can understand it. Just about every rider has an asterisk next to the their names.

Does it even matter? do we just watch the races, enjoy them and not worry too much if the results are modified a few months/years later?

I'm not sure what to do anymore. I think I'm beyond caring anymore.

And so it is; When is a result a result?

 

[Jeanne]

So where does cycling go to from here? McQuaid and co. have bunkered down and waiting for the winds to pass but for cycling fans what to do?

The results from the last 20 years are now null. I'm not sure how anyone pieces it together or can understand it. Just about every rider has an asterisk next to the their names.

Does it even matter? do we just watch the races, enjoy them and not worry too much if the results are modified a few months/years later?

I'm not sure what to do anymore. I think I'm beyond caring anymore.

And so it is; When is a result a result?

Exactly that (bold part). That's what I do. Cycling is still very entertaining, at least for me. I just don't feel like celebrating too much for "winners". Who knows, maybe a year or so later, it's not the winner anymore

 

[Mr.DNA]

I have ten years of cycling mags in a filing cabinet in the garage. At this point I can't imagine ever wanting to look through them again, knowing how badly all the articles need to be revised. So I guess they're headed to the dumpster. Even the photos mean nothing.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So where does cycling go to from here? McQuaid and co. have bunkered down and waiting for the winds to pass but for cycling fans what to do?

The results from the last 20 years are now null. I'm not sure how anyone pieces it together or can understand it. Just about every rider has an asterisk next to the their names.

Does it even matter? do we just watch the races, enjoy them and not worry too much if the results are modified a few months/years later?

I'm not sure what to do anymore. I think I'm beyond caring anymore.

And so it is; When is a result a result?

Well, "let's move on" is the current catchphrase.

The last week in cycling has been challenging, not just for fans, but for the sport in general.
What is troubling is that instead of all this being an inevitable result from a pro-active anti-doping policy very little has been learnt and very little has changed in the sport.

The riders are punished yet the same people are running the teams and the sport.

Personally, I still watch and get excited about particular races - however it is very much in the 'enjoy the moment' way. Almost as soon as the race is over it is forgotten, I do not dwell or celebrate any performance.
To answer your question - I enjoy the tactics, spectacle, etc but the result is pretty much meaningless.

 

[Benotti69]

<snip>

The riders are punished yet the same people are running the teams and the sport.

Because of the above there can be no 'moving on'. It is moving from 1 doping performance to the next doping performance.

It has made it difficult to cheer any riders, even with all those spouting, yes spouting about a cleaner peloton. Amazing how quickly some forget the recent 2 soigneurs caught with doping products, the ongoing CONI investigation, Ricco who is not a maverick doper and at the head of it all McQuaid.

Personally, I still watch and get excited about particular races - however it is very much in the 'enjoy the moment' way. Almost as soon as the race is over it is forgotten, I do not dwell or celebrate any performance.
To answer your question - I enjoy the tactics, spectacle, etc but the result is pretty much meaningless.

Yep on the above. It also why i dont post too much in the road racing part as i dont know much about a lot of individual riders anymore. Not interested in getting behind 1 team or rider to only find out the bad news.

 

[stainlessguy1]

check out the other thread

for a bit of humour check out the thread i started under General ,

So what are you going to do now Genius .

 

[thehog]

Because of the above there can be no 'moving on'. It is moving from 1 doping performance to the next doping performance.

It has made it difficult to cheer any riders, even with all those spouting, yes spouting about a cleaner peloton. Amazing how quickly some forget the recent 2 soigneurs caught with doping products, the ongoing CONI investigation, Ricco who is not a maverick doper and at the head of it all McQuaid.



Yep on the above. It also why i dont post too much in the road racing part as i dont know much about a lot of individual riders anymore. Not interested in getting behind 1 team or rider to only find out the bad news.

There appears to be more tolerance level these days. There was a time around 2004-2008 that if you were involved in any form of doping investigation ASO wouldn't allow you to race. That rule has since gone in 2009.

But the problem remains if the UCI doesn't like you or you don't toe the line and you're caught in some form or another they will nail you to the wall for life. No wonder cyclists are scared of the UCI. Most are doping and you'd better hope you have some favours in the bank when caught because you need all the help you can get.

Ricco is the great example of this. If he'd won 2 Tours and 2 Giro's before his test then he'd be riding today. I don't think his maverick style of doping was any different than Armstrong's.

I guess around Tour time most will have forgotten what has unfolded this week and celebrate the race at hand.

I guess Phil & Paul will have plenty to play at with Contador going down and Armstrong being "vindicated".

 

[Master50]

The results from the last 20 years are now null. I'm not sure how anyone pieces it together or can understand it. Just about every rider has an asterisk next to the their names.

If the asterisk point was actually true or in other words everyone was doing it then where is the problem? Your assumption says that everyone from second to last place would be the same as the winner but without a test to prove your point. The playing field was therefore a level one and the results are honest in context of "everyone's" behaviour. There is only a problem if you don't really believe they were all on the juice. There is only a moral dilemma if you believe that honest riders exist and were cheated. So were there clean riders or were they all on a program?
I will frame the last 20 years as an age of enhanced speeds. I have never been capable of riding with those guys whether they rode clean or assisted. Their ability to go long far and oh so fast will always be a source of wonder and excitement. Even in retrospect the epic battles between armstrong and ulrich will still awe me. The stage where Landis recovered his lead was exciting and I don't believe for an instant that his performance on that day was entirely drug assisted since by most measures the guys that were chasing him were getting help too.
I do pray for a day where we assume most riders are clean rather than jump to crucify every rumour, or see every great ride as a result of chemical assistance. I am certain that we have turned the corner and even the riders are believing that clean racing is possible and in fact the rule rather than the exception. If anything I think it is us the fans that need to reset.

 

[Steel4Ever]

Should be entertaining to watch the schleck's try to "attack" in July!

I'll be watching Roubaix and that'll be it for me.
Hopefully it'll be muddy as sh!t !

 

[x0einstein0x]

Personally, I will never see cycling remotely the way I did before the Fuentes bomb dropped, I'm afraid. I used to race from 1994 to 2005, hoping to become a pro. Before the '98 Tour, I never really thought that doping could've been a serious problem in any sport, and after '98 I was just too quickly convinced the media were making stuff up and/or things had changed.
I think before '98, I was simply too young to learn about the whole problem. After '98 I was uninformed and naive enough to keep believing pro cycling was mostely clean. I hadn't read Kimmage's book back then, nor did I read Voet's book when it came out, and in addition to that neither my U23 teammates nor any of my trainers really talked about doping, let alone offering me anything of that sort, so I in my immediate environment things were good.

After quitting racing in 2005 and researching the whole matter, though, I lost all belief in any high-performance sports. For me, it's basically been ruined by people who care more about making money then anything else and I don't see how that whole system would change.

On the other hand, I'm sure that at least here in Germany the inhibition threshold to take up doping has risen considerably over the last decade and the sport is now probably cleaner then ever. Today's youngsters usually strongly oppose doping, especially in the U19 and below categories. Unfortunately, because of cycling's horrible image in the public, even the local races are now badly lacking sponsors and will soon be lacking racers, too.

I enjoy the tactics, spectacle, etc but the result is pretty much meaningless.

Same. I'm still inclined to watch the odd race on TV, especially when my former teammates would be taking part. But what usually affects me more is watching my friends race at the (largely clean) local amateur races, or going for a Sunday ride with them.

 

[FoxxyBrown1111]

Still watching, but paying the least possible. The same i do with NFL. Those pro sports guys are no role models, especially not for kids. Not worth to pay them.

Here is how my boycott works:
I do not buy/consume anything from sponsors of UCI and ASO. I will never pay entrance for a race. Watch out JV: Your franchise cyling will not work w/europeans (not to offend americans here). We are no idiots.

All this is not only b/c of doping, which is difficult to defend. But b/c of the double standards applied (on one side the scapegoats like Ullrich, Rasmussen; on the other end guys like Armstrong, FSchleck running free and milking naive fans of millions) and corruptions going on.

My boycott can´t be 100% because i still watch races on Eurosport and enjoy cyclingnews . And i have to admit i was buying one edition of cycling manager in 2009. Nothing is perfect, compromises do be done.

 

[Carols]

I wrote this on another thread, but it applies here:

The key is just to enjoy the sport and the spectacle. Cycling is a chess match played out on the road, facing obstacles and adversity, conquering or failing.

There is no need to glorify or villify, simply enjoy.........

------------------

The sport will go on, I will continue following it. They have doped since it began and they will continue to, don't fool yourself for one second. It is the way of sport. So just let it go and enjoy the races as they unfold. Have favorites to root for but don't be disappointed if/when they get caught. I've been watching them get caught for decades (I'm 61) guess I'm immune to all the outrage now......

Lance is the only one I refuse to forgive (like he cares). He is a dirty, lying cheater. That is the price I paid for believing in him!

 

[Merckx index]

If the asterisk point was actually true or in other words everyone was doing it then where is the problem? Your assumption says that everyone from second to last place would be the same as the winner but without a test to prove your point. The playing field was therefore a level one and the results are honest in context of "everyone's" behaviour. There is only a problem if you don't really believe they were all on the juice.

The level playing field argument fails for at least two reasons:
1) athletes may respond differently to the same performance enhancers;
2) the random (or at any rate, uneven) nature of doping sanctions. Some riders have their careers ended; some have them seriously interrupted; some never get caught.

I am certain that we have turned the corner and even the riders are believing that clean racing is possible and in fact the rule rather than the exception.

You do understand, don't you, that this mantra has been repeated every few years since the late 90s, if not longer? Post-Festina the peloton was declared clean--until Rumsas, Tyler, Heras, etc. Post Armstrong it was declared clean--until Puerto, Vino, Rasmussen, Ricco, etc. In 2010 some people argued the speeds suggested cleaner riding--then we got Bert. Now Voeckler finishes ahead of Bert in the Tour, and we're supposed to be certain he's clean?

 

[Neworld]

The level playing field argument fails for at least two reasons:
1) athletes may respond differently to the same performance enhancers;
2) the random (or at any rate, uneven) nature of doping sanctions. Some riders have their careers ended; some have them seriously interrupted; some never get caught.

Until cycling cleanses itself, as best possible, it will be solely entertainment. As for the last 20 years being dope filled that is hard to argue. As I have said many times before, this 2 decade dope-fest does NOT mean all dpers doped equally or were tested equally; certainly not governed equally.

Things that I feel would help:
1. Raceradios: get rid of them. As CarolS says, "its chess at 50Kms/hr". Let the spontaneity of the racers make the race. Leave the neutral chalk boards, and leave the riders with maps in their pockets if they like, but the instantaneous managing is...boring. Rider safety as Jens says...humm. I disagree. 100 riders pinning it at 60Km/hr being told there is a nasty corner coming up and they better get to the front, causing a rabid crescendo of anxiety into that very corner; is that improved safety?

2. Biometrics and Drug testing. Until someone can come up with something better there is a strong benefit in recording all values from the time an athlete enters the proranks, and then revisiting them each year. Data trends man, trends. Heck the coaches and DSs recruit riders based on biometric data, it must be important so record it.

3. New format: maybe a N.Am style prof system work but maybe it will. It may allow for standardization of team salaries, universal testing, formats, rider disability, rider drug dependence support...

4. Egalitarian former riders: Where are all, or any, of the former riders/coaches that want a fair system. Ok, it will never be universally fair, but anything is better than now.

5. Amnesty: This is not my idea but someone's from a while back. Offer riders Amnesty and preservation of the their titles if they 'inform' the CAS or WADA of DS, coaches or managers that endorse doping.

Just some thoughts off the top of my head.

NW

 

[Race Radio]

I don't know about cycling but some Masters Triathlete is going to be spending a lot of money on legal fees for the next few years.

Meanwhile, Belgium awaits

 

[Ulle Relaxes]

Until the USADA investigation verdict is down it isn't over.

 

[Neworld]

Meanwhile, Belgium awaits

That is the most beautiful 'cycling' things I have seen in years.

Thank you

NW

 

[Sciocco]

One of my favorite aspects of watching sport, in the long term that is, is to watch history. As a recent example, watching Federer win the 2009 Wimbledon (stuff whatever opinions about him doping you have) was truly memorable. I guess Armstrong winning his 6th TdF fits as well. It is watching an accomplishment that may never happen again, or you may never see again. There is a TdF winner every year, but historical records can stand for either a rather short (years) to a rather long (decades) amount of time.

If any rider ever threatens Merckx's 11 GTs, I sure as hell will make it a point to watch.

In the short term:
hope the peloton falls apart on a hilly route,
hope Cav crashes on the flat stages,
watch Hushovd win stages that maybe he should not be able to,
dream of a GT with no flat stages,
and resuming in August, watch Contador climb mountains.

 

[Jeanne]

I don't know about cycling but some Masters Triathlete is going to be spending a lot of money on legal fees for the next few years.

Meanwhile, Belgium awaits

Wow, that is beautiful! Would make a nice poster

*offtopic

 

[The Plediadian]

I have ten years of cycling mags in a filing cabinet in the garage. At this point I can't imagine ever wanting to look through them again, knowing how badly all the articles need to be revised. So I guess they're headed to the dumpster. Even the photos mean nothing.

Don't feel bad. You can always cut out the pictures of the riders and have the kids play pin the donkey, er racehorse.

Also those photos make striking paper airplanes.

 

[Markyboyzx6r]

Agree with the general sentiment. I still watch, but simply cannot get the enthusiasm I used to. I wish, I honestly dearly wish, I'd known about the EPO issue back in 1990 - 1996 when I was training like a maniac and not even beginning to approach the perfomances of the guys I watched on TV.

I used to read Cycle Sport mag and I'd read the Gewiss riders talk about their use of interval training contributing to their improved performance and wondering how I could do the same. I remember an obituary in one of the early copies of Cycle Sport with Robert Millar talking about some doctor who had died, with him saying that that doctor had always been controvertial but he'd been a good man cause he'd done things to help as he was interested in the riders health. I remember reading that and naively wondering what that meant. I'd cane myself in training but still be miles off what the europeans were doing.

Naive. I was naive. Even in 1999, I really believed all that Tour of Redemption rubbish and as I've said in posts before, I stood on the road and cheered in the TDF. I supported those riders, making myself look like an idiot just as all those people standing cheering a certain Masters Pro Triathlete today are making themselves look like idiots.

It's a dirty sport. The DS's, the UCI, the riders and even the fans continue to make it a dirty sport. Any person that says that they don't care about doping but rather salute the perfomances is, in their own small way, contributing to the death of pro cycling. If pro sport is about creating excitement and exciting memories, what memories do we have from the last 20 years? Every memory as well as every result has an asterisk against it.

If the fans want cycling to become WWE, fine. Sit there. Do nothing. I love the sport to much to be part of this sham. The outrage of the Spaniards to Contador's suspension say it all, they don't care about clean sport. That's their problem, though, not mine. Simply because they've launched their toys out the pram doesn't mean we (those that want clean sport) should bow down before them. Things like this are easy to fix. The UCI could fix the drugs issue in an instant if they wanted to. Ignore the legal stuff - I'll say it again, they could clean this sport up today if they wanted to. But, they don't. They'd rather protect their ever-reducing cashflow.

There was a sign held up by a Barcelona supporter at Luis Figo's first appearance in a Real Madrid shirt "We hate you so much because we loved you so much". Pretty much sums it up for me. There's many many potential fans out there who simply won't go near cycling because it goes against everything that sport should be.

The stupid thing is - the sport doesn't actually NEED dope. It's good enough on its own terms as a spectacle. If the will was there cycling could be absolutely brilliant again. How can one possibly expect Bjarn Riis to be commited to anti-doping, it makes about as much sense as asking a labrador to look after a nice fresh cream bun while you pop down the shops. He knows only one way of working, the people in cycling know only one way of working, omerta isn't so much a philosophy as a religion in cycling. The people within it just can't see how their sport looks from outside the bubble.

"Cycling's cleaning up its act". Pfff. Just like it did in 1999.