The cycling fan's hypocritical parallel world ;-)

May 5, 2009
696
1
0
Ok, this thread is not to be taken too serious. i was just trying to get out of my cycling addiction. how is it possible that these guys lie and cheat numerous times and we always return and never can get enough of race action? what is it that makes this sport so addictive for some like me (and most of you probably), while others find it boring and just throw dirt at the sport.

Common. Let's be honest. We don't care about clean or not. We want action. We want Riccò and Lance rockets shooting up the mountains. We want action. We want riders loaded to the limit, doing unnatural things. We want Cancellara (or any other rider, whoever) destroying contenders on the Muur or demoralise them by riding solo away 50km before the finish line. We want il Falco descending like a madmen risking his life, bad luck if one or two die or really hit the f... We freak out seeing Chicken and Dopador sprinting up the Tourmalet.

Aren't we ready for the madhouse? Is this just human?

But we don't like the riders taking us for stuping idiots, telling us lies and saying they have been clean or never tested positive. Don't they have any respect for our fans? Do they really think we are such morons? We don't want Birillo telling us he just wanted to dope. We dont' like Amigo de Birillo telling us he paid Fuentes for training plans.
RIDERS: Just shut up and don't comment the D-subject! Let us enjoy cycling. Like hijo de rudicio said, everybody who can't add 1+1 in order to know what's been going on in this sport, can't be helped.

On another aspect, wouldn't it be good for a change if they posted methods, doctors and program details online in order we can try it out @ home!

Again, don't take this thread and my words too serious... time wasting discussion of cycloholics, with a pinch of truth in it...
 
Dec 30, 2010
850
0
0
You are the exception.

Obviously the level of enthusiam for fans that will join up to a cycling forum is greater than most. Because of this enthusiam, you are willing to put up with the "hypocracies" of the game.

The sport will have trouble growing, if the public perceives that it is corrupt however.
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
la.margna said:
Ok, this thread is not to be taken too serious. i was just trying to get out of my cycling addiction. how is it possible that these guys lie and cheat numerous times and we always return and never can get enough of race action? what is it that makes this sport so addictive for some like me (and most of you probably), while others find it boring and just throw dirt at the sport.

Common. Let's be honest. We don't care about clean or not. We want action. We want Riccò and Lance rockets shooting up the mountains. We want action. We want riders loaded to the limit, doing unnatural things. We want Cancellara (or any other rider, whoever) destroying contenders on the Muur or demoralise them by riding solo away 50km before the finish line. We want il Falco descending like a madmen risking his life, bad luck if one or two die or really hit the f... We freak out seeing Chicken and Dopador sprinting up the Tourmalet.

Aren't we ready for the madhouse? Is this just human?

But we don't like the riders taking us for stuping idiots, telling us lies and saying they have been clean or never tested positive. Don't they have any respect for our fans? Do they really think we are such morons? We don't Birillo telling us he just wanted to dope. We dont' like Amigo de Birillo telling us he paid Fuentes for training plans. RIDERS: Just shut up and don't comment the D-subject! Let us enjoy cycling. Like hijo de rudicio said, everybody who can't add 1+1 in order to know what's been going on in this sport, can't be helped.

On another aspect, wouldn't it be good for a change if they posted methods, doctors and program details online in order we can try it out @ home!

Again, don't take this thread and my words too serious... time wasting discussion of cycloholics, with a pinch of truth in it...
We do want to see the gladiators express themselves. I think it is a mistake to assume that every cyclist who has superior performances are dopers:ie
LeMond, Cancellera, Contador, Armstrong and Andy Schleck. I see 2 bad apples on your list, Cancellera I bet is a clean rider. How could you insinuate that he is a doper? Is it because he rode for Bjarne?

If you go to the extreme and call riders dopers when it has not been proven.... then I really do not understand why you watch the races.
You might as well go live under the shell of clean sports, as depicted by the German journalists. Which of course in their opinion cycling is a farce.
 
Dec 7, 2010
8,773
1
0
Andynonomous said:
Obviously the level of enthusiam for fans that will join up to a cycling forum is greater than most. Because of this enthusiam, you are willing to put up with the "hypocracies" of the game.

The sport will have trouble growing, if the public perceives that it is corrupt however.
In my opinion the sport is as large as it ever will be. No way it will grow here in the United States. I am have to say I enjoyed the few time Jan and Lance went at it at the TDF but that was not the only race I watched.
 
May 5, 2009
696
1
0
flicker said:
I think it is a mistake to assume that every cyclist who has superior performances are dopers:ie
LeMond, Cancellera, Contador, Armstrong and Andy Schleck. I see 2 bad apples on your list, Cancellera I bet is a clean rider. How could you insinuate that he is a doper? Is it because he rode for Bjarne?

If you go to the extreme and call riders dopers when it has not been proven.... then I really do not understand why you watch the races.
You might as well go live under the shell of clean sports, as depicted by the German journalists. Which of course in their opinion cycling is a farce.
Flicky, I think you didn't get the purpose of this thread and also take it a bit too serious.

However, I just wanted to state that I can't find any statement in my post where I say Cancellara is a doper. Sorry.

Furthermore, I don't get why you are of the opinion that I think other sports are cleaner.

Most sports are about money and business. If you have talent, that's fine. But if you are faster, stronger, have more endurance, are more confident and more concentrated, the odds are in your favour. In these areas a programme comes in. So no way any sport is cleaner than another.

The fact is, that when one scans the Top Ten placing lists of stages, one day races and GT's of the last twenty years, it's an easy thing to do the math. Sometimes it is difficult too understand why we don't believe the guys like Manzano, Bassons, Kohl, Landis, etc. Even further disturbing, that the power statistics say it all.

The thread should be why are we so addicted to this sport? Which, unfortunately, has a substantial number of positive tests and scandals and has a dirty history since it exists. A sport, where even many of the famous historic riders (including Coppi, Merckx, Kelly, just to name a few) were tested positive or confessed (more or less openly) about the use of such substances. How long and how strong can they f..ck with us until we have enough? My statement is: never. We are to crazy and addicted to this sport. We are freaks. Whatever will come, we will not move away. Vive le Cyclisme.
 
Dec 30, 2010
850
0
0
flicker said:
We do want to see the gladiators express themselves. I think it is a mistake to assume that every cyclist who has superior performances are dopers:ie
LeMond, Cancellera, Contador, Armstrong and Andy Schleck. I see 2 bad apples on your list, Cancellera I bet is a clean rider. How could you insinuate that he is a doper? Is it because he rode for Bjarne?

If you go to the extreme and call riders dopers when it has not been proven.... then I really do not understand why you watch the races.
You might as well go live under the shell of clean sports, as depicted by the German journalists. Which of course in their opinion cycling is a farce.

Unfortunately, when the sport does not do enough to weed out the CHEATS, the clean riders get painted with the same brush (we can never know for certain who is clean).
 

flicker

BANNED
Aug 17, 2009
4,153
0
0
la.margna said:
Flicky, I think you didn't get the purpose of this thread and also take it a bit too serious.

However, I just wanted to state that I can't find any statement in my post where I say Cancellara is a doper. Sorry.

Furthermore, I don't get why you are of the opinion that I think other sports are cleaner.

Most sports are about money and business. If you have talent, that's fine. But if you are faster, stronger, have more endurance, are more confident and more concentrated, the odds are in your favour. In these areas a programme comes in. So no way any sport is cleaner than another.

The fact is, that when one scans the Top Ten placing lists of stages, one day races and GT's of the last twenty years, it's an easy thing to do the math. Sometimes it is difficult too understand why we don't believe the guys like Manzano, Bassons, Kohl, Landis, etc. Even further disturbing, that the power statistics say it all.

The thread should be why are we so addicted to this sport? Which, unfortunately, has a substantial number of positive tests and scandals and has a dirty history since it exists. A sport, where even many of the famous historic riders (including Coppi, Merckx, Kelly, just to name a few) were tested positive or confessed (more or less openly) about the use of such substances. How long and how strong can they f..ck with us until we have enough? My statement is: never. We are to crazy and addicted to this sport. We are freaks. Whatever will come, we will not move away. Vive le Cyclisme.
I agree with you on every point. I might add that Manzano, Bassons, Kohl, and Landis are some of the few non hypocrites in the sport. Especially Floyd
(Hiding in his Idyllwild mountain stronghold like Geronimo, off the reservation, ready and plotting his next strike against the settlers) Landis.
Those guys I named have absolutely nothing to gain by exposing the awful truth. ( Which we the fans knew, buried in our sub- conciousness already.)

I hope their truths do not destroy the sport.
 
Sep 10, 2009
5,663
0
0
la.margna said:
Common. Let's be honest. We don't care about clean or not. We want action. We want Riccò and Lance rockets shooting up the mountains. We want action. We want riders loaded to the limit, doing unnatural things. We want Cancellara (or any other rider, whoever) destroying contenders on the Muur or demoralise them by riding solo away 50km before the finish line. We want il Falco descending like a madmen risking his life, bad luck if one or two die or really hit the f... We freak out seeing Chicken and Dopador sprinting up the Tourmalet.
I would like to see riders pushing themselves to the limit and collapsing over their bikes at the top of the Alpe like they did in the 80s when I first started following cycling, not riding like robots and chatting on cell phones like they did in the past 2 decades. I'd like to see back and forth, see-saw battles again, as one rider cracks and then recovers when his competitor cracks and then recovers, not one rider/one team dominating from start to finish.

So I totally disagree - compared to racing in the pre-EPO days, what we've seen during the heavy-duty doping era has been completely predictable, uninteresting, and just downright boring, actually.
 
May 5, 2009
696
1
0
What I miss the most is, favourite GT riders who take a risk, i.e. who don't cycle with a calculator or a rationale brain, like Velocity mentioned, no robots. A guy who rides an all-out-full attack on the third last or second last climb with the risk to lose all.
 
Jun 15, 2009
835
0
0
la.margna said:
Ok, this thread is not to be taken too serious. i was just trying to get out of my cycling addiction. how is it possible that these guys lie and cheat numerous times and we always return and never can get enough of race action? what is it that makes this sport so addictive for some like me (and most of you probably), while others find it boring and just throw dirt at the sport.

Common. Let's be honest. We don't care about clean or not. We want action. We want Riccò and Lance rockets shooting up the mountains. We want action. We want riders loaded to the limit, doing unnatural things. We want Cancellara (or any other rider, whoever) destroying contenders on the Muur or demoralise them by riding solo away 50km before the finish line. We want il Falco descending like a madmen risking his life, bad luck if one or two die or really hit the f... We freak out seeing Chicken and Dopador sprinting up the Tourmalet.

Aren't we ready for the madhouse? Is this just human?

But we don't like the riders taking us for stuping idiots, telling us lies and saying they have been clean or never tested positive. Don't they have any respect for our fans? Do they really think we are such morons? We don't want Birillo telling us he just wanted to dope. We dont' like Amigo de Birillo telling us he paid Fuentes for training plans.
RIDERS: Just shut up and don't comment the D-subject! Let us enjoy cycling. Like hijo de rudicio said, everybody who can't add 1+1 in order to know what's been going on in this sport, can't be helped.

On another aspect, wouldn't it be good for a change if they posted methods, doctors and program details online in order we can try it out @ home!

Again, don't take this thread and my words too serious... time wasting discussion of cycloholics, with a pinch of truth in it...
The rationale behind my addiction is simply that I'm a weekend warrior myself, riding several national 200-600 km races a year, and I've worked as a physician for one of the top-ranked teams for a period of 6 years. But I DO care whether they ride clean or not.
 
Aug 12, 2010
63
0
0
robots on bikes

I came to be interested in cycling by events like these:

-Stephen Roche's climb up La Plagne in 1987's Tour (to keep Pedro Delgado in sight)

-Steve Bauer, a career Classics and one day rider, finishing 4th in the 1988 Tour and looking every bit as exhausted as you would expect (yes, I'm from Canada)

-the back and forth battle between Fignon and LeMond in 1989's Tour

Riders had bad days. Their tactics didn't always work. They looked tired after a mountain stage. Of course, that era had "enhancements" too, but the riders appeared to be more mortal.

Then we saw, thanks to EPO, PED's, race radios, team tactics and the emergence of specialists:

-the robot known as Miguel Indurain ride really well in the time trials and then shadow every contender from 1991-1995

-LA revolutionize the sport by focussing on one race only per year, have eight foot soldiers deliver him to the final climb, then take as much time as he wanted
from 1999-2005

-AC follows mostly the same procedure as LA in his three victories

Some people love the last 20 years of cycling. The "Blue Train" delivering Lance to the foot of the Alpe. Some people remember a time when it was different, and in my opinion, better. At least there's still mountain biking, cyclocross and women's racing to follow.
 
May 13, 2009
692
1
0
la.margna said:
Flicky, I think you didn't get the purpose of this thread and also take it a bit too serious.

However, I just wanted to state that I can't find any statement in my post where I say Cancellara is a doper. Sorry.
.
Cancellara clean???? :eek::p:
 
May 5, 2009
696
1
0
pleyser said:
...looking every bit as exhausted as you would expect...

...had bad days....

...focussing on one race only per year, have eight foot soldiers deliver him to the final climb...
yeah, couldn't agree more with you.

In particular I forgot about this disrespectful and sad focus on one GT per year. B4 Pharmstrong, people like Indurain, Pantani, Rominger and other big guns seriously targeted at least two GT's!
 
May 21, 2010
581
0
0
Totally agree with VeloCity and pleyser.

Look at old footage of Eddy in the mountains-he ain't making it look easy. On the contrary, he's making it look hard. He's struggling to get up those climbs. You don't wonder "how can he make it look so easy" flying up every Col as is the case of today's riders, you see him struggling and think "how can he keep ON doing that" when it's so obviously painful.

Check out Indurain's stage win in the 1989 TdF. You can see him struggling there too and he's riding in a completely different style to the way he rides the 1991-95 Tours.

To see them push themselves so hard is part of the majesty of bike racing.
 
Oct 23, 2010
20
0
0
Lemond a dope?

Andynonomous said:
Unfortunately, when the sport does not do enough to weed out the CHEATS, the clean riders get painted with the same brush (we can never know for certain who is clean).
You are precisely right!

I am curious as to how one can state with certainty that a particular rider (er … say Lemond) competed clean? Given the history of the rampant doping practices in the sport since its inception (yes … pre-EPO era), and the fact that blood doping has been medically possible since the early 1900's (and still remains virtually undetectable), I find these statements to be laughable at best. Oh ... and just for the record ... no, I am not an LA fan, neither I am anti-American. I do however, happen to be a huge fan of such natural athletes as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan.

 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
la.margna said:
Ok, this thread is not to be taken too serious. i was just trying to get out of my cycling addiction. how is it possible that these guys lie and cheat numerous times and we always return and never can get enough of race action? what is it that makes this sport so addictive for some like me (and most of you probably), while others find it boring and just throw dirt at the sport.

Common. Let's be honest. We don't care about clean or not. We want action. We want Riccò and Lance rockets shooting up the mountains. We want action. We want riders loaded to the limit, doing unnatural things. We want Cancellara (or any other rider, whoever) destroying contenders on the Muur or demoralise them by riding solo away 50km before the finish line. We want il Falco descending like a madmen risking his life, bad luck if one or two die or really hit the f... We freak out seeing Chicken and Dopador sprinting up the Tourmalet.

Aren't we ready for the madhouse? Is this just human?

But we don't like the riders taking us for stuping idiots, telling us lies and saying they have been clean or never tested positive. Don't they have any respect for our fans? Do they really think we are such morons? We don't want Birillo telling us he just wanted to dope. We dont' like Amigo de Birillo telling us he paid Fuentes for training plans.
RIDERS: Just shut up and don't comment the D-subject! Let us enjoy cycling. Like hijo de rudicio said, everybody who can't add 1+1 in order to know what's been going on in this sport, can't be helped.

On another aspect, wouldn't it be good for a change if they posted methods, doctors and program details online in order we can try it out @ home!

Again, don't take this thread and my words too serious... time wasting discussion of cycloholics, with a pinch of truth in it...
I love your post, man. Especially the bolded part. I haven't even read the rest of the thread yet, but i just wanted to jump right in and tell you that. Lulz. Thanks for being honest, too.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
VeloCity said:
I would like to see riders pushing themselves to the limit and collapsing over their bikes at the top of the Alpe like they did in the 80s when I first started following cycling, not riding like robots and chatting on cell phones like they did in the past 2 decades. I'd like to see back and forth, see-saw battles again, as one rider cracks and then recovers when his competitor cracks and then recovers, not one rider/one team dominating from start to finish.

So I totally disagree - compared to racing in the pre-EPO days, what we've seen during the heavy-duty doping era has been completely predictable, uninteresting, and just downright boring, actually.
pleyser said:
I came to be interested in cycling by events like these:

-Stephen Roche's climb up La Plagne in 1987's Tour (to keep Pedro Delgado in sight)

-Steve Bauer, a career Classics and one day rider, finishing 4th in the 1988 Tour and looking every bit as exhausted as you would expect (yes, I'm from Canada)

-the back and forth battle between Fignon and LeMond in 1989's Tour

Riders had bad days. Their tactics didn't always work. They looked tired after a mountain stage. Of course, that era had "enhancements" too, but the riders appeared to be more mortal.

Then we saw, thanks to EPO, PED's, race radios, team tactics and the emergence of specialists:

-the robot known as Miguel Indurain ride really well in the time trials and then shadow every contender from 1991-1995

-LA revolutionize the sport by focussing on one race only per year, have eight foot soldiers deliver him to the final climb, then take as much time as he wanted
from 1999-2005

-AC follows mostly the same procedure as LA in his three victories

Some people love the last 20 years of cycling. The "Blue Train" delivering Lance to the foot of the Alpe. Some people remember a time when it was different, and in my opinion, better. At least there's still mountain biking, cyclocross and women's racing to follow.
Elagabalus said:
Totally agree with VeloCity and pleyser.

Look at old footage of Eddy in the mountains-he ain't making it look easy. On the contrary, he's making it look hard. He's struggling to get up those climbs. You don't wonder "how can he make it look so easy" flying up every Col as is the case of today's riders, you see him struggling and think "how can he keep ON doing that" when it's so obviously painful.

Check out Indurain's stage win in the 1989 TdF. You can see him struggling there too and he's riding in a completely different style to the way he rides the 1991-95 Tours.

To see them push themselves so hard is part of the majesty of bike racing.
OK, now I have read the thread and I have to say brilliant, brilliant, brilliant to these three posts. I appreciate the candor and honesty and humor of the OP, and I agree with him that we, most of us, will keep watching. But I also agree with these posters that cycling was once more compelling than it is now.

Personally, I don't have a problem with riders having a bit of medical assistance. I'm not a Carrie Nation (she led Prohibition efforts in the U.S.), anti-doping type of person. What I do care about is that doping practices since Indurain's time have taken what was once the human drama of cycling and turned it into some kind of ersatz, cookie cutter procession to selling bikes and shoes. Boooring.

We all know they are going to dope. Fine. But the doping practices should be limited to those things that don't interfere with the excitement and drama of the sport.

Also, the Armstrong practice of racing to win only one big race must be banned. A professional racer must compete throughout the year, and must be compelled by the rules to do so. Obviously no rule can force a rider to actually try to win, but at the very least they can be compelled to ride.
 
Oct 23, 2010
20
0
0
Maxiton said:
We all know they are going to dope. Fine. But the doping practices should be limited to those things that don't interfere with the excitement and drama of the sport.

Also, the Armstrong practice of racing to win only one big race must be banned. A professional racer must compete throughout the year, and must be compelled by the rules to do so. Obviously no rule can force a rider to actually try to win, but at the very least they can be compelled to ride.
I definitely agree with the Armstrong argument. He is the 'cherry picker' of cycling.

As far as the PED's taking the excitement out of the sport ... I am not quite sure what you mean? Are you saying that todays athletes do not put out as much effort during races? There can be only one first place finisher, and I know that if I were in second place while on route (drug or no drugs) I would be pedalling my *ss off to take the win. Today's athlete's are ever improving on past performances, because PED's allow the cheating SOB's to put in more frequent hardcore efforts during training runs from which they now can recover more easily.

With respect to the lack of grimacing and effort on today's athletes ... could it perhaps be traced to the use of Botox? God knows they inject everything within arms reach into their bodies.
 
Estonia77 said:
You are precisely right!

I am curious as to how one can state with certainty that a particular rider (er … say Lemond) competed clean? Given the history of the rampant doping practices in the sport since its inception (yes … pre-EPO era), and the fact that blood doping has been medically possible since the early 1900's (and still remains virtually undetectable), I find these statements to be laughable at best. Oh ... and just for the record ... no, I am not an LA fan, neither I am anti-American. I do however, happen to be a huge fan of such natural athletes as the Ultimate Warrior and Hulk Hogan.
...
Funny picture/note.

But, Estonia, you are a new poster. Hopefully not a paid shill.

But, in your first (second?) post, you have already gone after another of the classic Lance defenses - Greg must have done it.

Here is the deal. I will be as strident about pursuing any firm evidence on Lemond as I have been on posting about Lance or any other doper.

You find it, I will support you.

But, I will not and cannot support what does not exist.

It is impossible to conceive that Lance wouldn't have already have paid a lot of money to try and uncover some dirt.

In case you were not aware, Lance lost in the Trek versus Lemond action.

This is a lost cause. Suggest you leave sleeping dogs alone.

Dave.
 
D-Queued said:
Funny picture/note.

But, Estonia, you are a new poster. Hopefully not a paid shill.

But, in your first (second?) post, you have already gone after another of the classic Lance defenses - Greg must have done it.

Here is the deal. I will be as strident about pursuing any firm evidence on Lemond as I have been on posting about Lance or any other doper.

You find it, I will support you.

But, I will not and cannot support what does not exist.

It is impossible to conceive that Lance wouldn't have already have paid a lot of money to try and uncover some dirt.

In case you were not aware, Lance lost in the Trek versus Lemond action.

This is a lost cause. Suggest you leave sleeping dogs alone.

Dave.
You forgot to mention the denial of being a Lance fan. Page 1 of the playbook.
 
red_flanders said:
You forgot to mention the denial of being a Lance fan. Page 1 of the playbook.
Whoever is passing along the playbook would do themselves - and the new recruits - a big favor if they pointed out some of the major potholes with many of these stupid assertions.

Let's go over today's list.

1. Suggesting that, for example, Lance is not central to the investigation is more than laughable. It also allows an opportunity to use Lance's taunting twitter statements and refresh everyone's memory of what an a-hole he is. Mario Puzo didn't even write of such open taunting of a prosecutor.

2. Similarly, as in this case, playing the Lemond card (certain to bring much attention) after the recent settlement of the Trek vs Lemond suits and countersuits in Lemond's favor, allows the opportunity to point out that Lance et al have been trying for a long time to unearth dirt on Greg. And, again, to refresh everyone's memory of what an a-hole HWSNBN is.

3. Then, there is the waste of taxpayer's money argument. Right, we really want the government to not pursue enforcement of the law. Given current international news, the US judicial system is looking pretty good right now. Do you really want to suggest that Lance or anyone else is above the law? That strengthens your case?

Stupid^3

Can't they put someone intelligent in charge of the talking points? Please?

Or, are these simply the best talking points that can be found? In that case, if I were the fresh meat I would take the paycheck and run for the hills.

Surely there is a better employer out there with better prospects of being able to continue paying you.

Dave.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
Estonia77 said:
I definitely agree with the Armstrong argument. He is the 'cherry picker' of cycling.

As far as the PED's taking the excitement out of the sport ... I am not quite sure what you mean? Are you saying that todays athletes do not put out as much effort during races? There can be only one first place finisher, and I know that if I were in second place while on route (drug or no drugs) I would be pedalling my *ss off to take the win. Today's athlete's are ever improving on past performances, because PED's allow the cheating SOB's to put in more frequent hardcore efforts during training runs from which they now can recover more easily.

With respect to the lack of grimacing and effort on today's athletes ... could it perhaps be traced to the use of Botox? God knows they inject everything within arms reach into their bodies.
Don't be coy. Give me a break. You know what the riders are doing. We all know. And we can all see what it looks like. The culprit here, the primary culprit, is oxygen-vector drugs. A secondary but still significant factor is hormone abuse.

VeloCity said:
I would like to see riders pushing themselves to the limit and collapsing over their bikes at the top of the Alpe like they did in the 80s when I first started following cycling, not riding like robots and chatting on cell phones like they did in the past 2 decades.
pleyser said:
Riders had bad days. Their tactics didn't always work. They looked tired after a mountain stage. Of course, that era had "enhancements" too, but the riders appeared to be more mortal.
Elagabalus said:
Look at old footage of Eddy in the mountains-he ain't making it look easy. On the contrary, he's making it look hard. He's struggling to get up those climbs. You don't wonder "how can he make it look so easy" flying up every Col as is the case of today's riders, you see him struggling and think "how can he keep ON doing that" when it's so obviously painful.
If it weren't so increasingly obvious that riders were doping, maybe no one would care. But it's as though the riders have said, hey, let's push this performance enhancement thing as far as possible - see what we can get away with. Basically, in fact, that is what's happened. Over the decades, fans have noticed. Hey, wait a minute, they say, this sport doesn't look very similar to the one I fell in love with decades ago. What's happened to cycling? Oh, the answer comes back, um . . . better bikes and shoes. To which you've now added . . . Botox. Right.

Pro cycling can keep playing that game, but fewer people are fooled by it, as cycling is rendered less entertaining and compelling than it once was, not that long ago.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
BlueRoads The Clinic 2

ASK THE COMMUNITY