• 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!

Stop watching/sponsoring prosport (poll included)

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.

Stop watching prosport events. Good idea?

  • yes

    Votes: 17 34.7%
  • no

    Votes: 28 57.1%
  • vino 4ever

    Votes: 4 8.2%

  • Total voters
    49
Re: Re:

sniper said:
Rob27172 said:
I am afraid you might as well have a poll that reads

Humans Cheat - Boycott being human
...
Some fair points.

but I do not quite agree.
Imo, it's about the sheer concentration of fraud, cheating, and corruption in pro-sport.
Sure, it happens everywhere in all sections of society, but not at such a high density as in present day pro-sport.

It's really a kind of maffia, there's no better way to describe it.
And why would we support that.

Why would we support it? Because we like watching sports and its a big part of our (at least my) life and always has been. Best entertainment, regardless of dope or not.. some would even argue that doping contributes to the entertainment.

Some sour and cynical clinic-members stopping watching sports won't matter one bit, lol.
 
Re: Re:

Valv.Piti said:
sniper said:
Rob27172 said:
I am afraid you might as well have a poll that reads

Humans Cheat - Boycott being human
...
Some fair points.

but I do not quite agree.
Imo, it's about the sheer concentration of fraud, cheating, and corruption in pro-sport.
Sure, it happens everywhere in all sections of society, but not at such a high density as in present day pro-sport.

It's really a kind of maffia, there's no better way to describe it.
And why would we support that.

Why would we support it? Because we like watching sports and its a big part of our (at least my) life and always has been. Best entertainment, regardless of dope or not.. some would even argue that doping contributes to the entertainment.

Some sour and cynical clinic-members stopping watching sports won't matter one bit, lol.
I agree. For example, how could we forget that epic battle between LA and Pantani on Ventoux; two high-responders duking it out to the finish...that's entertainment:

https://youtu.be/6q38Gyjv4EE
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
And while we reminisce about lance vs. Pantani, who's seriously going to reminisce any performance from say 2010 onwards where nobody knows if we weren't watching a motor race.
 
Re:

sniper said:
And while we reminisce about lance vs. Pantani, who's seriously going to reminisce any performance from say 2010 onwards where nobody knows if we weren't watching a motor race.
The motor thing gets old. I know it's discussed a lot on the clinic. But where is the EVIDENCE? No rider has ever been caught. No whistleblower has ever come foward (how do you keep a secret like that for so long?). Just because LeMond "thinks" motors are being used doesn't mean anything. It's pure speculation at best. Next someone is going to say that holographic projections are being done of some of the riders..Lol. And if it's motors, then the sport is done. Nobody will ever be interested because any couch potato chump could eventually get on a bike and compete. It becomes no longer cycling, but a motor sport and the next thing you know the motorcycle racers will be wanting to do it :(
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
Valv.Piti said:
sniper said:
Rob27172 said:
I am afraid you might as well have a poll that reads

Humans Cheat - Boycott being human
...
Some fair points.

but I do not quite agree.
Imo, it's about the sheer concentration of fraud, cheating, and corruption in pro-sport.
Sure, it happens everywhere in all sections of society, but not at such a high density as in present day pro-sport.

It's really a kind of maffia, there's no better way to describe it.
And why would we support that.

Why would we support it? Because we like watching sports and its a big part of our (at least my) life and always has been. Best entertainment, regardless of dope or not.. some would even argue that doping contributes to the entertainment.

Some sour and cynical clinic-members stopping watching sports won't matter one bit, lol.
I agree. For example, how could we forget that epic battle between LA and Pantani on Ventoux; two high-responders duking it out to the finish...that's entertainment:

https://youtu.be/6q38Gyjv4EE

But then the sport would be reduced to the level of grotesque gargoyles like all the other meaningless 'pro sports' like wrestling for instance. People with no respect for their own lives. Naturally gifted riders with some self respect who didn't want to be part of the charade would be excluded. You really think that's interesting and worth watching? So weird, I just don't understand it.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
Trust the riders? With what (that they are riders)? I don't get why I would need to trust them. Cycling is still cycling, independent on me trusting the riders.

Parents may care (a lot) about what their children do, but for many parents, the love for their child is (largely) independent on those actions. It really isn't that hard a concept to grasp.

Trust that they're not jacked up to the gills with notoriously effective performance enhancing drugs maybe? What does 'cycling is cycling' mean? It's the sort of thing I've been hearing from Theresa May about Brexit, utterly vapid.
I'm not talking about cycling for recreation, we're discussing competitive professional road racing. It could be a magnificent thing, if only one could believe that what you're seeing is genuine. But it's not, it's a charade. How can you be satisfied with, nay obsessed and excited about, something which isn't real? That's what I mean. And it's possible to cure the sick patient with anger and focus, but the fans can't be bothered because the charade is so wonderfully entertaining.
I hear your frustration, but why pick on a sport that's had a history and culture of doping since the days of "Anquetil's Cocktail." Oxygen-vector doping didn't start nor end with Armstrong either, as some fans still believe this. And if you think this is the "new, clean era" of cycling, that would also be misleading and a classic case of "disinformation." The CIRC report from last year tells us a culture of doping still exists but that it's been primarily pushed underground. It also mentions that doping doctors are still being used as a resource. This may outrage some cycling fans while other fans may not be that surprised and continue to watch and enjoy the sport for what it's worth.

And cycling always seems to be the punching bag when doping is prevelant in other endurance sports, and may be more worse than cycling right now. For example, I follow track & field and road running pretty closely, and I can tell you that over the last several years so many performances are being questioned and the issue of doping is front & center. In Rio, three (3) World records were set in two distance events & one sprint, and many are suspicious of those performances. And when you factor in that the Kenyans, arguably the world's best distance runners, have had over *40* doping positives in the last several years, and the fact that they're not part of the ABP (no WADA-accredited labs are in the area), virtually every impressive performance by them is questioned nowadays (also at Rio a Kenyan coach was sent home for attempting to pass a sample for one of his top runners at a drug control...Lol) And sadly, running just had it's "Festina affair" last June when world-renowned coach Jama Aden (coach of several world class runners & one world record holder) was found with a large cache of EPO & steriods at a training camp in Spain. Imagine that.

This is about as egregious as it gets for competitive T&F and road running. So talk about a charade...doped up Kenyans flying around the track & roads (and we all thought only those dreaded Russians were doping...Lol). So, it isn't just cycling as PEDs are everywhere (there's even a doping XC sking thread with it's many problems). Some people will continue to be entertained...because we don't know who's doped and who isn't, and the reality may be that everyone is using PEDs from to extent or another. It may be as Riis once said back in his day that doping is the "normal preparation for a professional cyclist." Everyone has a choice and no one is being forced to watch or support these sports. If the governing bodies & WADA can't clean it up and ensure a clean field, then that's their problem...not mine. The UCI could implement a lifetime ban for a first offense (i.e., zero tolerance). They could eliminate these ridiculous TUEs that they know are being used for the primary purpose of performance enhancement. The IOC could have banned the Kenyans from Rio for their doping history and non-compliance with WADA. None of this is occurring...why? Perhaps frustrated and angry fans should blame the hierarchy. Even the Grand old game of golf has a doping problem that surpasses cycling. Golf? Can't be...now that's funny:

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/golf/golf-surpasses-cycling-and-athletics-for-drug-findings-1.2301094

Hi, I tried replying yesterday but I think the administrators blocked me (I sent them an email but got no reply). You're being too thin-skinned here I think, the only reason I'm posting is not because I've got a particular downer on cycling, it's because I love it. I'm fully aware of the history, but comparing Anquetil's doping to the modern version is just silly. Admittedly it was just as dangerous, but it didn't work!
I just wish the 'fanboy' obsessive types would get a grip, and realise their apathy is destroying the very thing they purport to love. They're as complicit as all the Cooksonss and Sapsteads of this world.
 
"I just wish the 'fanboy' obsessive types would get a grip, and realise their apathy is destroying the very thing they purport to love. They're as complicit as all the Cooksonss and Sapsteads of this world."

I'd say that the fair weather fans, who flee whenever dirt gets uncovered are way more complicit. If everyone (who watched cycling) was like me, cycling wouldn't have dropped in popularity after Puerto or after USADA vs. Lance. As it is now, the sport has a clear interest in not cleaning it up, but instead pretend that there isn't a problem. The best possible fans for a clean sport are those, who demand it to be cleaner, and who are also ready to support it while the sport's dirt is out in the open, as it is impossible to clean it otherwise.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Netserk said:
"I just wish the 'fanboy' obsessive types would get a grip, and realise their apathy is destroying the very thing they purport to love. They're as complicit as all the Cooksonss and Sapsteads of this world."

I'd say that the fair weather fans, who flee whenever dirt gets uncovered are way more complicit. If everyone (who watched cycling) was like me, cycling wouldn't have dropped in popularity after Puerto or after USADA vs. Lance. As it is now, the sport has a clear interest in not cleaning it up, but instead pretend that there isn't a problem. The best possible fans for a clean sport are those, who demand it to be cleaner, and who are also ready to support it while the sport's dirt is out in the open, as it is impossible to clean it otherwise.

Save it for the judge Netserk, who do you think you're kidding?
 
So you don't think that the massive commercial loss that real anti-doping work results in has any impact on how dedicated the sport is in cleaning itself? You don't think it has had any impact at all that the German TV stations pulled the plug nearly a decade ago (although they were happy to cover cycling the decade before that...) on the sport's will to do something about the present problems?
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Netserk said:
So you don't think that the massive commercial loss that real anti-doping work results in has any impact on how dedicated the sport is in cleaning itself? You don't think it has had any impact at all that the German TV stations pulled the plug nearly a decade ago (although they were happy to cover cycling the decade before that...) on the sport's will to do something about the present problems?

Real anti-doping work? What, like the UKADA investigation of the Linda McCartney team for instance? I suppose you were massively vocal about that? Just like the gargoyle supporter I answered above? Believe me matey, you think things are bad now commercially, with attitudes like that you ain't seen nuthin' yet.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Netserk said:
^^Strawmen and shifting the goalposts.

How about you actually answered the (quite simple) questions? If you do that, I will answer yours.

Eh? Moving goalposts? My answer was plain and clear, what you perceive as a terrible commercial loss is not an improving state of affairs. Which bit of 'you ain't seen nuthin' yet' don't you understand?
Now provide me links to your outraged posts about Sapstead and UKADA's 'investigation' into the Linda McCartney team.
 
So not only do you deny the obvious regarding the moving of the goalposts and your refusal to answer (if you forgot the questions you are free to read them again), you also continue with your strawmen. At least have the decency to admit what you do.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re:

Netserk said:
So not only do you deny the obvious regarding the moving of the goalposts and your refusal to answer (if you forgot the question you are free to read them again), you also continue with your strawmen. At least have the decency to admit what you do.

God it's like debating with a five year old. The short answer is no. The very fact you're arguing the toss with me over your non-point rather than, say, engaging with gargoyle-boy speaks volumes.
Now, dig out your enraged posts please.
 
Re: Re:

Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
So not only do you deny the obvious regarding the moving of the goalposts and your refusal to answer (if you forgot the question you are free to read them again), you also continue with your strawmen. At least have the decency to admit what you do.

God it's like debating with a five year old. The short answer is no. The very fact you're arguing the toss with me over your non-point rather than, say, engaging with gargoyle-boy speaks volumes.
Now, dig out your enraged posts please.
Was that so hard to write? (you are of course welcome to provide a longer answer, but the no is sufficient)

...

I don't have any 'enraged posts about Sapstead and UKADA's 'investigation' into the Linda McCartney team.' I also have never ever pretended to have had that. It was a strawman. If you don't think it was a strawman, you are free to show me where I pretended have had such posts.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
So not only do you deny the obvious regarding the moving of the goalposts and your refusal to answer (if you forgot the question you are free to read them again), you also continue with your strawmen. At least have the decency to admit what you do.

God it's like debating with a five year old. The short answer is no. The very fact you're arguing the toss with me over your non-point rather than, say, engaging with gargoyle-boy speaks volumes.
Now, dig out your enraged posts please.
Was that so hard to write? (you are of course welcome to provide a longer answer, but the no is sufficient)

...

I don't have any 'enraged posts about Sapstead and UKADA's 'investigation' into the Linda McCartney team.' I also have never ever pretended to have had that. It was a strawman. If you don't think it was a strawman, you are free to show me where I pretended have had such posts.

Wow, genuinely pretty thick, amazing. The fact you haven't posted anything on the subject proves you don't care, get it?
The fact you're arguing with me rather than gargoyle-boy proves it too. Get it?
 
Re: Re:

Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
Okay, when you are ready to drop the fallacies, give me a call. (answer to your deleted post)
.

My deleted post was a mistaken posting of your post Einstein.
Not really, you had just left your reply within the quote of my post. Other than that it was quite clear to read your post. No need to delete it, you could just have edited it and extracted your reply from the quote. Whatever, the only reason I wrote that it was a reply to your deleted post was because it looked quite bizarre to reply to nothing, so I added that part after I realized that the post I replied to was deleted.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
Okay, when you are ready to drop the fallacies, give me a call. (answer to your deleted post)
.

My deleted post was a mistaken posting of your post Einstein.
Not really, you had just left your reply within the quote of my post. Other than that it was quite clear to read your post. No need to delete it, you could just have edited it and extracted your reply from the quote. Whatever.

Oh thanks for the advice, that's a very salient and important part of our debate, much appreciated.
 
Oct 30, 2012
428
0
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Netserk said:
Grandillusion said:
Netserk said:
So not only do you deny the obvious regarding the moving of the goalposts and your refusal to answer (if you forgot the question you are free to read them again), you also continue with your strawmen. At least have the decency to admit what you do.

God it's like debating with a five year old. The short answer is no. The very fact you're arguing the toss with me over your non-point rather than, say, engaging with gargoyle-boy speaks volumes.
Now, dig out your enraged posts please.
Was that so hard to write? (you are of course welcome to provide a longer answer, but the no is sufficient)

...

I don't have any 'enraged posts about Sapstead and UKADA's 'investigation' into the Linda McCartney team.' I also have never ever pretended to have had that. It was a strawman. If you don't think it was a strawman, you are free to show me where I pretended have had such posts.

My whole posting history is one big NO by the way, as if you didn't know. Go and read some John Hoberman books on this subject and educate yourself. Brilliant stuff.
 
Oct 16, 2010
19,912
2
0
Visit site
Re: Re:

Nomad said:
...
The motor thing gets old.
more like "is just getting started".
I know it's discussed a lot on the clinic.
cool, yet you seem not to have read much of it.
But where is the EVIDENCE? No rider has ever been caught.
you got some serious reading up to do. Take your time. :)
No whistleblower has ever come foward (how do you keep a secret like that for so long?).
Ask Sherwen. :rolleyes:
For real though, that used to be the traditional Lance defense line. It's now Sky's defense line. Not very convincing.

Just because LeMond "thinks" motors are being used doesn't mean anything.
It's not "just" Lemond. And why the quotation marks? He thinks it. Period.
And why "doesn't it mean anything"? That's an odd thing to say.
You complain about lack of whistleblowers, yet when Lemond speaks up you dismiss it as meaningless.
 
I quit watching the Tour of France back in 2007. Not because I hated it but I had to write my thesis back then and so had to isolate myself. Oddly enough I realise that I didn't miss it for a million and that's why I never watch it ever after. After all many posters back then asked me why I still was watching if I didn't enjoy it. So I guess I've got more coherent when no longer watching it.

I cannot speak about other pro sports because I'm only interested in cycling and so have been since the turn of the century. After all we are here on a cycling forum, so we should talk about cycling. I've never understood all these threads about doping in other sports, brackets closed.

What is sure is that we have every reason to quit watching pro cycling when it gets too dirty because if the peloton gets too dirty, of necessity the race gets too boring. If they all juice up, they are all too strong for the race and it becomes a boring sprint fest. See MIlan-Sanremo, see the Arrow, see the plains stages in GT's.

I've never understood how some posters on here could argue that doping enhances entertainment, it's obviously the opposite. They would show the example of Pantani but really, but he could attack first because he juiced up a lot more than average, 60% hematocrit (many riders still did not take EPO at all) while the generation afterwards all juiced up about the same and second I lived the Pantani years and can tell you that mountain stages with him were a lot more boring than younger posters thought they were. Usually he only attacked in the last climbs of the day, so up to that point, we were bored.

What brings entertainment is not just blasting attacks in the mountains or on the cobbles but also massive blows of "the man with the hammer". Riders suffering - how sadistic it is - is always great to see for the viewers. That is the epicness of cycling. It's not a game of football or handball. I think Guimard was the one to distinguish between games and competition. Football is a game, cycling is competition, it's a sport.
 

TRENDING THREADS