Stereotyping all pro cyclists as dopers

[luckyboy]

He's even said he's happy to ride lower down the order knowing that there are dopers in front of him, because he just enjoys riding his bike.

If Moncoutie has said that about riders in front of him - apparently without any abuse from other riders, it makes you wonder why others don't.

Also, I don't know whether to be happy for him or saddened that he could be doing better without the dopers around.

I've seen Moncoutié used as a yardstick for what clean riders are capable of on this forum - this is fair enough but has one fatal flaw: it makes the assumption that there isn't anybody more naturally talented than David Moncoutié (or as talented as David Moncoutié but more dedicated). So it stands to reason that, considering his lackadaisical attitude to training and GC riding, a clean rider of similar talent level but who treats the sport more seriously could do better than Moncoutié; a superior talent who treats the sport more seriously could, in theory at least, do a LOT better than Moncoutié - and considering he has a GT top 10 on his palmarès (8th, 2008 Vuelta) that's where you start opening up the possibilities of GT riders who are clean.

Or certainly people going for top 10 finishes.

For all we know, Moncoutie could be the best climber in the world. But (obviously) with doping, nobody can tell who is rightfully the best etc.

 

[Boeing]

I see no evidence that a reasonable sample survey of the group mentioned are together or individually aware of such a label

typically, People from stereotyped groups can find this very disturbing as they experience an apprehension (stereotype threat) of being treated unfairly.

How exactly is said group presumed to be treated unfairly in your example?

google that google boy

you are generalizing about people assumed to be generalized. hasty?

 

[patricknd]

Most normal, law abiding, rule following, moral people are disturbed by the direct correlation between doping and cycling success.

I don't dare characterize the personality/psychological traits of those who are ok with fraudulent behavior.

is that all fraudulent behavior, or would that be a more selective definition? where would you draw the line on rule following? where would, oh say, breaking forum rules fall into what you consider disturbing behavior?

 

[auscyclefan94]

if we waited for the UCI to get hard facts then there would be no doping....


Moncoutie is famous for not taking anything, not even vitamin tablets and his results tend to prove that. Sad that when a rider is clean we know about it, the rest, well we have to connect the dots and have our suspicions until the UCI picks on a rider, or the rider makes a mistake with their doping, like Frei or Riccó.

There are no hard facts with regards to Evans but his position in the sport is very close to doping from his time at teams heavily associated with doping, T-Mobile to Rihs now.

Heavily associated would be involved in a doping ring. Nothing of the sort has been proven. Anyway, I guess Evans must be clean because he follows many buddhist morals and teachings which are about integrity, etc.

If Moncoutie is clean, he has featured highly in gc and mountain stages of many stage races, why cant some others be top riders. Again, my original point about cofidis stands.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

<snipped>

Stereotype:
1. A conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image.
2. One that is regarded as embodying or conforming to a set image or type.


PLease tell me how that comments was stereotyping. I will help you out. Look at the word "some".


Finally a rational opinion....Though in response to people who think Evans is dirty, Cofidis was known to have some doping going on, so why is Moncoutie said to be clean? That assosiciation of guilt is all you have but I would rather not turn this thread into what it is turning into. Keep it on topic some of you.

Well, what is the topic of this thread?

You have said that "A "diary entry" from Cadel's wife highlighted a situation that some posters on this forum do, stereotyping all pro cyclists as being dopers".
Have a look at the dictionary reference you quoted - "oversimplified conception, opinion, or image"

Very very few here hold that opinion - some certainly say it as a generalization but in a separate post will turn around and say rider x is clean.

If there are "some" who hold that view - why not just name them and address them directly? If it's their view you will not upset them.

From what I can see you appear to be having a pop at some (unnamed) posters here - and are using comments from a riders wife who is upset at one journalists comments, which you admit you have not read - so, what topic were you hoping to address?

 

[popolo]

You tell me.

is that all fraudulent behavior, or would that be a more selective definition? where would you draw the line on rule following? where would, oh say, breaking forum rules fall into what you consider disturbing behavior?

I don't think people should be executed for speeding or jaywalking.

I don't think the sanctions for cheating in cycling should be a prison term.

As for not following the rules of the forum, the sanctions are what they are and they are implemented by the authorities of the forums.

I view the forum, kind of the way I view Bradley Manning. He may have violated the "rules/laws," but truth and transparency is a higher law.

It seems to me his punishment is much greater than his "crime."

You may disagree..

Do you think there should be suspensions for cheating in cycling and criminal sanctions for fraud in charitable organizations?

 

[popolo]

You have your own definition of transparency and honesty that probably doesn't fall in line with normal human interaction. Why don't you help us out?

It's evident you need the help and I'm a charitable sort so here goes.

Do you think JV is transparent? I don't.

My suggestion is truth and reconciliation immediately. Then, any positive is a 4 year ban. Second strike, lifetime ban. That goes for DS too. Fine the owners a half $M. Second strike for owner, lifetime ban.

Surely it is possible to define a point in time, due to the actions of the players, that the peloton is proven clean? It is much easier to hide behind generic bs talking points like 'transparency' and 'honesty' that enables you to be the perpetual cynic on your own terms and timelines Mr. Popolo. Please enlighten us on how we know when somebody is telling the truth and being transparent. If possible please frame your answer in terms of what is actually feasible in the real world instead of popolo bizarro land.

Surely???? Are you not paying attention to the performances and the general cynicism of the fan base?

You do realize you are in the tiny minority, don't you?

Just as an example, is JV telling the WHOLE truth? Unless he is, it's obvious he's not being transparent by definition.

My world is bizarro? I'd say the apologist world where blood is drawn and then reinjected and all kinds of dangerous drugs are used to enhance performance, is the bizarro world. Evidently you're ok with this?

You're ok with the evasions/fraud of UCI, Contador, Hog, Riis, JV?

All frauds by the way. Am I wrong?

 

[Angliru]

I generally disregard those posts where a blanket accusation of doping is made directed at all professional cyclists. I would guess that many are made in jest or out of frustration, similar to those that call all Spanish pros "dirty" (although some likely believe it to be fact).

We are aware that there were various riders, by proclaimation of their own doping teammates, were declared clean and resistant to the team "program" that existed at the time. Maybe I'm naive but I'd prefer to enjoy the sport day-by-day, event by event. Should someone test positive, that is just a part of sport in general as we know it.

I believe the "stereotype" exists more within the segment that is less passionate or not at all about the sport than some and that is due primarily to the mainstream media (I am speaking only of the US) focusing on each and every doping story as opposed to the actual events, teams and riders that are the foundation of the sport.

 

[biokemguy]

What's an anecdote?

go to the website of ivan basso and check his watt output of the giro he won last year and in 2006, over 40 watt down, despite now being in his physical peak and he still won the giro of 2010... that says a lot

Sorry for going of topic, but this generalization is not supported by good data IMHO. Generalizations on both sides of the argument are problematic.

I'm not looking for yet more anecdotes.

I think a better measure would be to look at the riders who just barely make the time cut. If their power has decreased, then I might believe the argument that decreases in power reflect less doping.

 

[Benotti69]

Heavily associated would be involved in a doping ring. Nothing of the sort has been proven. Anyway, I guess Evans must be clean because he follows many buddhist morals and teachings which are about integrity, etc.

if you have a team of 20-30 riders and you are supplying them with dope then that to me is a doping ring.

 

[patricknd]

I don't think people should be executed for speeding or jaywalking.

i'm still undecided on this one

I don't think the sanctions for cheating in cycling should be a prison term.

i don't either. prisons are for the speeders and jaywalkers

As for not following the rules of the forum, the sanctions are what they are and they are implemented by the authorities of the forums.

and we should all follow them, right?

I view the forum, kind of the way I view Bradley Manning. He may have violated the "rules/laws," but truth and transparency is a higher law.

it's a cycling forum. at the end of the day how important is it?

It seems to me his punishment is much greater than his "crime."

if he made a willing sacrifice of his freedom for his beliefs i admire him. if he thinks he should go unpunished then i would disagree, but only some. leaking secrets is vastly different than selling them, and his penalties should reflect that

You may disagree..

Do you think there should be suspensions for cheating in cycling and criminal sanctions for fraud in charitable organizations?

yes i do, and fairly applied across the board.

 

[Galic Ho]

Popolo you sure seem like an angry young lad or lass whatever the case may be. You can get your point across without being condescending and beligerent.

Fact is that I think cycling is cleaning up. One of the leading advocates for clean sport Jonathon Vaughters has posted frequently on this forum and he has debunked alot of the stereotypes tossed about. He has put several shreaking posters in their place for sure.

Thankfully we have people like him that can help turn the tide away from the cheaters to the new clean breed.

Wow! What astounding intellect you possess! JV putting people in their place.

One name. Bradley Wigans. Explain that champ? Don't let the door hit your **** on the way out of the Clinic. Plenty of threads talking about Wigans and Garmin doping. They go back years. No real cycling fan sits at home and thinks Wigans transformed ala LA style by just losing weight. Sheesh, troll some more?

Cycling is cleaner, but it is far from clean. Stop defending ACF94, he's upset Cuddles is the focus once more. Ryo Hazuki...WTF!!! Is Valverde not one of your favourite riders? DO you know ACF94's long held notions on Valverde? Doper to the core...all the evidence and sound reasoning point to the same thing about Cadel. Hero worship.

ACF94, you've got your nose out of joint. You know we have a saying down under, "Harden the F&%$ up princess and stop your crying." Evans wife, Chiara can do the same. If she doesn't like the fact Evans is riding for the team owned by a known doping apologist who oversaw Landis doping practices with Allan Lim (go search that name Akbar you might learn something), then too bad. Her problem.

Some people really are pathetic. ACF94, you cry, cry and then cry some more over other people doping (worse you stereotype an entire nation on multiple occasions), but when Evans name is thrown in with the lot, heaven forbid. Grow up dude and find a pair. If the heat is too much, get out of the pan.

Condescending and beligerent? No realist. Some people demand to be treated like they are specialty, royalty, that the rules somehow don't apply to them. Superior beliefs breed superior attitudes. There is no understanding in that mentality, no room for rational and relating to other people. No equality or accountability in that. Being an adult calls for compromise and balance. Calling a spade a spade. Deal with it or perhaps don't post in the Clinic if your skin isn't thick enough. Oh and Akbar, thanks for the laugh about JV...Mr Clean! Priceless.

 

[Oldman]

I generally disregard those posts where a blanket accusation of doping is made directed at all professional cyclists. I would guess that many are made in jest or out of frustration, similar to those that call all Spanish pros "dirty" (although some likely believe it to be fact).

We are aware that there were various riders, by proclaimation of their own doping teammates, were declared clean and resistant to the team "program" that existed at the time. Maybe I'm naive but I'd prefer to enjoy the sport day-by-day, event by event. Should someone test positive, that is just a part of sport in general as we know it.

I believe the "stereotype" exists more within the segment that is less passionate or not at all about the sport than some and that is due primarily to the mainstream media (I am speaking only of the US) focusing on each and every doping story as opposed to the actual events, teams and riders that are the foundation of the sport.

That the stereotype exists is a continuation of each drug use story or so it seems. When a team is waiting for their high profile "star" to signal the start of serious team campaigns the message sent is clear: he doped then and we "believe" he is clean (as in, we don't care but will hope). A note that came up in the Barry Bonds thread was his unemployability. If the Cyclists' union and teams took an even approach (hell, any approach) to handling prior blatant offenders the sport would have less of an image problem. They are all so mired in shades of grey, supplements, tainted foods, etc that it's hard to believe even the honest players. That is a problem they can fix if they want to.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

That the stereotype exists is a continuation of each drug use story or so it seems. When a team is waiting for their high profile "star" to signal the start of serious team campaigns the message sent is clear: he doped then and we "believe" he is clean (as in, we don't care but will hope). A note that came up in the Barry Bonds thread was his unemployability. If the Cyclists' union and teams took an even approach (hell, any approach) to handling prior blatant offenders the sport would have less of an image problem. They are all so mired in shades of grey, supplements, tainted foods, etc that it's hard to believe even the honest players. That is a problem they can fix if they want to.

Exactly, look at not only the way in which OP was mishandled and covered up. But we have DDL being welcomed back, Vino being welcomed back. We've got Movistar courting Valverde even before he is back from his ban. While cycling talks a good fight when it comes to dealing with doping and dopers, the reality is that it can't and won't back it up with action.

Look at the flak that the Cardinals got for hiring McGwire, and yet it is considered perfectly ok for the likes of Zabel, Holm, Aldag, Hog, Riis, Rihs, etc to run teams and to be involved in the sport.

We've seen how teams like Sky, Garmin etc who started out with ethics have quickly and quietly relented on their pledges.

The situation is made worse by a compliant media. While there was plenty of outrage about McGwire being hired in the media, contrast that to the lack of criticism of say DDL being hired by Katusha, or the old dopers at HGH, Leopard etc etc

Even symbolically, look at the way in which the dopers are being kept out of the hall of fame in baseball. And yet in cycling old dopers are welcomed back with open arms, time and time again.

I am reminded of a conversation with a politician who complained that he and his countrymen were always being labelled as corrupt. The response was 'Well stop doing stupid things, stop taking bribes and stop promoting corrupt officials.'

If Cuddles were as vocal in his criticism of dopers like Contador, Armstrong etc as he is in attacking cameramen and the Chinese government, I'd take his complaints a lot more seriously.

 

[Oldman]

Exactly, look at not only the way in which OP was mishandled and covered up. But we have DDL being welcomed back, Vino being welcomed back. We've got Movistar courting Valverde even before he is back from his ban. While cycling talks a good fight when it comes to dealing with doping and dopers, the reality is that it can't and won't back it up with action.

Look at the flak that the Cardinals got for hiring McGwire, and yet it is considered perfectly ok for the likes of Zabel, Holm, Aldag, Hog, Riis, Rihs, etc to run teams and to be involved in the sport.

We've seen how teams like Sky, Garmin etc who started out with ethics have quickly and quietly relented on their pledges.

The situation is made worse by a compliant media. While there was plenty of outrage about McGwire being hired in the media, contrast that to the lack of criticism of say DDL being hired by Katusha, or the old dopers at HGH, Leopard etc etc

Even symbolically, look at the way in which the dopers are being kept out of the hall of fame in baseball. And yet in cycling old dopers are welcomed back with open arms, time and time again.

I am reminded of a conversation with a politician who complained that he and his countrymen were always being labelled as corrupt. The response was 'Well stop doing stupid things, stop taking bribes and stop promoting corrupt officials.'

If Cuddles were as vocal in his criticism of dopers like Contador, Armstrong etc as he is in attacking cameramen and the Chinese government, I'd take his complaints a lot more seriously.

As a world champion his words would have some power. You are absolutely correct.

 

[Paco_P]

A "diary entry" from Cadel's wife highlighted a situation that some posters on this forum do, stereotyping all pro cyclists as being dopers. Her diary entry is in response to a piece by Christiano Gatti for TuttoBiciWeb (i can't find the piece) who describes the role wives gilrfriends, etc play in their husbands or boyfriends play in doping.

http://www.cadelevans.com.au/chiara.aspx

What are your thoughts about this stereotyping?

A lot of wives don't know what their husbands do at work. And vice-versa.

If it were impossible to keep secrets from a spouse, the divorce rate wouldn't near 50%.

 

[JMBeaushrimp]

[/B]

As a world champion his words would have some power. You are absolutely correct.

Beauty! I'll be at the head, puking...

Ramping up for another decade of avoiding the TdF. At least the classics make it look obvious in one day. Cut to the chase, ya bunch of pill-freaks!

 

[StyrbjornSterki]

I don't think any rational, even moderately-well informed cycling fans believe all pro cyclists are doping. The guys who habitually are in l'autobus and the broom wagon obviously are not doping. Or if they are, they're doing it wrong.

The guys at the other end of the peloton, OTOH, ....

 

[rickshaw]

Most don't even have stereos

What are your thoughts about this stereotyping?[/QUO

the only group of athletes which is MORE victimized by doping stereotypes. I'm sure they just train and train and train...

 

[auscyclefan94]

Exactly, look at not only the way in which OP was mishandled and covered up. But we have DDL being welcomed back, Vino being welcomed back. We've got Movistar courting Valverde even before he is back from his ban. While cycling talks a good fight when it comes to dealing with doping and dopers, the reality is that it can't and won't back it up with action.

Look at the flak that the Cardinals got for hiring McGwire, and yet it is considered perfectly ok for the likes of Zabel, Holm, Aldag, Hog, Riis, Rihs, etc to run teams and to be involved in the sport.

We've seen how teams like Sky, Garmin etc who started out with ethics have quickly and quietly relented on their pledges.

The situation is made worse by a compliant media. While there was plenty of outrage about McGwire being hired in the media, contrast that to the lack of criticism of say DDL being hired by Katusha, or the old dopers at HGH, Leopard etc etc

Even symbolically, look at the way in which the dopers are being kept out of the hall of fame in baseball. And yet in cycling old dopers are welcomed back with open arms, time and time again.

I am reminded of a conversation with a politician who complained that he and his countrymen were always being labelled as corrupt. The response was 'Well stop doing stupid things, stop taking bribes and stop promoting corrupt officials.'

If Cuddles were as vocal in his criticism of dopers like Contador, Armstrong etc as he is in attacking cameramen and the Chinese government, I'd take his complaints a lot more seriously.

Well I would say he says more than most, anyway, what's the point of carrying on like a baby when it won't do anything? He has said things about certain riders such as landis, vino and valverde. More than what others have said.

 

[Mrs John Murphy]

If it won't do anything then he should STFU and stop complaining about being unfairly stereotyped.

BTW maybe Cuddles could tell us about his time at Saeco, Mapei and Telekom, or like David Millar at SD he saw nothing despite all his team mates being junkies?

If Cuddles or Mrs Cuddles don't like being stereotyped then they should maybe make a stand against the likes of Rihs and Jim O being allowed in the sport.

 

[Von Mises]

Philippe Gaumont rode for Cofidis between 1997 and 2004. For those 8 seasons, he said only two riders were clean: Moncoutié and Tombak. I'm not even going to calculate how many riders rode for Cofidis at the time.

I talked with Janek Tombak today and asked specifically about this Philippe Gaumont quote. Tombak rode for Cofidis 1999-2005. He said that Gaumont maybe exaggerating that there were only 2 clean riders. Though Tomabk added that there definetly more dopers than clean riders. He also admitted that as he himself did not dope, he may not know everything as he did not belong to "inner circle".

Tombak also confirmed that Moncoutié was clean.

I asked hime also what does he think about todays peloton (Tombak does not ride anymore, but he knows people) and he said that it is definetly much-much cleaner. He even made an example, that in 2008 he was first time able to finish Ronde van Vlaanderen, though, as he said, he was weak and old. 10 years earlier being younger, stronger and quicker, it was hard for him to stay even in peloton during Ronde van Vlaanderen.

 

[Fus087]

I asked hime also what does he think about todays peloton (Tombak does not ride anymore, but he knows people) and he said that it is definetly much-much cleaner. He even made an example, that in 2008 he was first time able to finish Ronde van Vlaanderen, though, as he said, he was weak and old. 10 years earlier being younger, stronger and quicker, it was hard for him to stay even in peloton during Ronde van Vlaanderen.

Not only did he finish, he also animated the race in the "pre-final". Tombak being in the front rows before Geraardsbergen is one of the things that come to my mind first when thinking about the 2008 Ronde.