To support or to not support dopers?

[Netserk]

Am I allowed as a Boonen fan to discuss Froome's doping as long as I also discuss Boonen's doping?

 

[the sceptic]

Horner is a doper?

What? Where is the evidence?

I hope this doesnt mean I need to find another clean rider to support.

 

[Zam_Olyas]

Am I allowed as a Boonen fan to discuss Froome's doping as long as I also discuss Boonen's doping?

I don't know...because boonen is not contador.

 

[blackcat]

For the most part, this is, I believe, the prevailing attitude in the forum: I like rider XYZ (for what ever non-doping reasons) and I despise rider ABC (for what ever non-doping reasons), but universally dislike doping. Yes, Blackcat, I know you have a different mindset, but I'm talking about your common garden variety poster.

myposition is not too far from yours actually.

i just dislike the political interference and some riders getting a free run. like Armstrong. It is pretty obvious when a rider is on the good sheeit. but they all do a little to get by.

and i really miss ricco.

i did luv cav til he got media training. he was infinitely amusing before he was given media soundbite101.

i also think millar would be better with one of those greyhound muzzles, cos he is insufferable. he is better just tossing his bike.

on the whole, the brits can grate on your nerves.

Wiggins, good, until he found the good gear, and then became a prat. Also, in 2007 when he came 4th in the chrono that Vino won, and he had a whinge/whine about his SRM meter and the power he put out and could not unnerstan how he could have lost. A whiner. you lost wiggo. stfu. And ofcourse he was doping on Cofidis. You dont suddenly get to 30 and pull the trigger. you retire if everyone is doping, you get the hell out of that environment if you dont like the doping. you dont join it.

no, wiggo was never clean. he just got on a better program and upped his doping with AICAR and some other sheeit to lose the weight, GW1516 or whatever.

I have no problem with the doping. I did. I definitely did. But i thought then, that my favourite riders were not doping, and they were getting wins stolen off them. and this is idiocy that prevails in this forum

 

[blackcat]

oh, and millar, we remember you talking about Vino at the Tour in 2007, when you were so "surprised that Vino was doping. He is my favourite rider. I cant believe Vino was doping".

And then Cav and you(Millar) out the boot into Ricco cos he is dumbfark stupid and does not play the political game. But you and Vandenvelde had such funny blood values after your St Moritz training camp before the Tour, that you were target tested.

Then you (Millar) whine about the Saunier Duval team of Mauro Gianetti. gees, that was easy wasnt it. Taking potshots at Saunier, at Ricco, expressing surprise at Vino, doping like nothing changed when you came back, but having really whacky blood values when Garmin debuts at the Tour.

I dont like hypocrites. I dont like Millar. He is a whining *** and should throw his bike, cos he has talent throwing his bike. There is no way he should ever be the UCI President. His cards should be marked.

 

[gooner]

Am I allowed as a Boonen fan to discuss Froome's doping as long as I also discuss Boonen's doping?

We're not the forum police at all.

I just don't think you can be taken seriously if you have one rule for one and a different one for someone else. There's nothing complicated about that.

I see around here Froome and Porte being called out which I have no issue with, but it's coming from fans of riders like Contador and Valverde where they have a totally differing opinion with their successes. You will never hear the word "ridiculous" said by them in a critical manner when a big win comes their way.

One doped performance is OK and the other is ridiculed.

What? Where is the evidence?

I hope this doesnt mean I need to find another clean rider to support.

The Horner reference was to the likes of you who want him doped to the gills and spin it as if he's some sort of victim that has stepped up to plate with his program in response to Sky's success.

That was going around a bit on here after his Vuelta win.

Is it OK to support a rider with this mindset? No, not in my opinion.

 

[The_Captain]

There is, I think, a difference in supporting a rider who once doped, and the attitude that I also see from time to time that you hope one rider dopes to beat another rider that you think dopes. That's exactly the attitude that got cycling into the mess it's been in - the arms race. Regardless of whether or not Froome is doping, if he's perceived to be doping, it leads to the attitude from a fan or cyclist that they need to dope in order to compete then that is where the problem lies.

Of course there will always be those who will cheat and try to find an illegal edge regardless, but I'd like to think that the majority, if they felt they were on a level playing field, would back themselves to find a legal edge and compete, and not be tempted by the darker side.

Slightly OT but there's also the side issue that the "entertaining" performances more often than not have been dope fueled. It's more efficient to just grind your way up a hill instead of sudden bursts of speed, and with radios, power meters etc cycling these days is just less entertaining with the whole race being micromanaged by the DSs. The train tactic isn't hugely popular, but would probably be just as effective even in a 100% clean peleton. This can lead to people cheering on doped performances as it's more entertainment - entertainment beats pure sport for some people.

 

[the sceptic]

The Horner reference was to the likes of you who want him doped to the gills and spin it as if he's some sort of victim that has stepped up to plate with his program in response to Sky's success.

That was going around a bit on here after his Vuelta win.

Is it OK to support a rider with this mindset? No, not in my opinion.

Of course Horner isnt a victim. He juiced to the gills and reaped the rewards. But sky started this new era, and everyone else has to figure out what they have to do to be competitive.

As I have a strong dislike for Sky, Id rather take Horner juiced to the gills than watching Sky winning every race for 6 months. Its pretty similar to how I felt in the Lance years, I would root for anyone that had a chance at beating him.

 

[blackcat]

Of course Horner isnt a victim. He juiced to the gills and reaped the rewards. But sky started this new era, and everyone else has to figure out what they have to do to be competitive.

As I have a strong dislike for Sky, Id rather take Horner juiced to the gills than watching Sky winning every race for 6 months. Its pretty similar to how I felt in the Lance years, I would root for anyone that had a chance at beating him.

i like chris. great guy.

just because he wins, try and pick on the insufferable dopers, not the unlucky dopers like ricco. and just cos chris wins, dont pick on him. pick on Cav, or Millar, those cats. they are insufferable

 

[the sceptic]

i like chris. great guy.

just because he wins, try and pick on the insufferable dopers, not the unlucky dopers like ricco. and just cos chris wins, dont pick on him. pick on Cav, or Millar, those cats. they are insufferable

Yeah obviously Horner isnt an arrogant dbag and that helps as well.

 

[King Boonen]

Maybe it's because pretty much no-one is defending Contador?


Personally, I separate the doping talk from watching the racing. I like to see guys and girls who ride their bikes well doing it, and that includes both Contador and Froome (I didn't say stylish!).

 

[red_flanders]

Maybe it's because pretty much no-one is defending Contador?

That's really all that needs to be said on the topic.

 

[JimmyFingers]

As much as you'd like it to be, it really isn't.

 

[Dazed and Confused]

I think cycling would become much more interesting this July, if Froome, Contador, Nibal and Valverde were all popped within a few hours.

 

[BYOP88]

I'm so glad I believe they're all dopers. Therefore I have no 'blood on my hands', the rest of you need to look at yourselves in a mirror and when 'rider s' dies due to doping I hope the police throw the book at you!

Gooner does this mean you won't be defending Sky/Garmin anymore, unless you defend the rest?

 

[King Boonen]

Look at what happens every time Robbie_Cannuck tries to defend Contador. The same guys who decry Froome also decry Contador.

The fact is there are many more talking points to do with Froome and Sky and many more people defending them than there are Contador et. al.

 

[veganrob]

party likes it 2006

 

[del1962]

Look at what happens every time Robbie_Cannuck tries to defend Contador. The same guys who decry Froome also decry Contador.

The fact is there are many more talking points to do with Froome and Sky and many more people defending them than there are Contador et. al.

No a subset of those who decry Froome decry Contador.

 

[King Boonen]

No a subset of those who decry Froome decry Contador.

So you expect every poster to reply to every thread?

 

[del1962]

So you expect every poster to reply to every thread?

No, but is definately a small subset though.

 

[roundabout]

Look at what happens every time Robbie_Cannuck tries to defend Contador. The same guys who decry Froome also decry Contador.

The fact is there are many more talking points to do with Froome and Sky and many more people defending them than there are Contador et. al.

Nobody gave a **** when Marti got banned.

Hell, I doubt anyone cared enough to ask Contador about it.

Compare and contrast it to the mass hysteria over a TUE.

 

[hrotha]

Nobody gave a **** when Marti got banned.

Hell, I doubt anyone cared enough to ask Contador about it.

Compare and contrast it to the mass hysteria over a TUE.

That's one for the journos. Unfortunately the Spanish media is much worse than the Anglophone media.

Martí's ban was never going to have much of an impact here because there wasn't much to discuss. Nobody gave us any ammo.

 

[roundabout]

There isn't really that much to discuss about Froome's TUE either (if one thinks that Marti's long-term association with Contador is not worth much discussion that is).

 

[hrotha]

Martí was a drug courier/dealer for US Postal, Landis and, presumably, Contador. Few people dispute that. There's been some discussion about whether or not his downfall was a factor in Contador's performance, but that's it. It's like discussing whether Rominger doped. When we *had* more to go by, like when he tested positive for clen, this here forum was full of discussions about Contador.

Froome hasn't been outed yet. More importantly, he's been the dominant GT rider for a couple of years now, and the general perception is that he's quite cozy with the UCI and the mainstream media, which hasn't been the case with Contador since 2010. I don't think it's significant or surprising that Froome and Sky get more attention, personally.

 

[blackcat]

No a subset of those who decry Froome decry Contador.

i decry neither. i know both are doping. just like the top 10 over the past three decades. all doping.