The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Raul Ramaya said:My point: I suspect the pool of lurkers is far larger than you think.
Race Radio said:The pool is much larger.
I have only used the Race Radio username here and seldom read other forums. I signed up on twitter as a lark and within weeks had over 1,000 followers. Now it is over 6,000. I have posted some links to some files here that have received well over 2,000 views.
Of course some of the groupies would prefer everyone to think it is just a couple of haters.
JRTinMA said:12, even JV agrees.
thehog said:Maybe one day then CyclingNews team will give us the stats on page views etc.
yeah.Race Radio said:JV was pretty quick to say
We push for Garmin to embed some kind of monitor because they are perhaps the only team that would do such a thing. Far more interesting would be inserting someone in RSNT or SKY. I wonder how open they would be to the idea?
I respectfully disagree, I don think that the position can be reconciled with advancing a clean ethicRace Radio said:If I am in JV's position I would do the exact, same thing. Anytime you have a chance to open the kimono with the top rider you do it. You also have to show publicly you are in the game, everyone does it. If we listened to Lefevre we would think he is about to signed every rider who wins a race.
Race Radio said:The pool is much larger.
I have only used the Race Radio username here and seldom read other forums. I signed up on twitter as a lark and within weeks had over 1,000 followers. Now it is over 6,000. I have posted some links to some files here that have received well over 2,000 views.
Of course some of the groupies would prefer everyone to think it is just a couple of haters.
No you're right. In that era, if there was no talk of doping, people believed there was none. Well I did anyway.Lanark said:Really? I barely heard that untill 4 years or so ago. I certainly can't remember anyone claiming cycling was practically clean in the early 00's.
thehog said:Begs the question if it really was only 12 why a DS would even bother posting here. I mean surely he has better things to do - like cleaning bikes and working on the internal anti-doping program that doesn't exist
...
Race Radio said:They already do it. The clinic has multiple threads that have over 100,000 views. One even has over 1,000,000
. . .
Those 12 guys sure are busy
Raul Ramaya said:I wonder about this. Take my example: I've been reading this forum with various stages of obsessiveness going back to 2006 (with some overlap early with the RoadBikeReview version). Only recently did something push me over the edge to actually post. I find it hard to believe I'm the only one.
My point: I suspect the pool of lurkers is far larger than you think.
hiero2 said:Would you guys knock it off? You are intentionally misreading and misrepresenting the original intent. And, thehog, you are making personal attacks while you are at it. NOT cool.
JV meant that the participants in this forum are a small group - and everything I see says that is true. All those views? Ask any online advertiser how many views they get compared to how many click-thru's compared THEN to how many ppl actually spend some time on the target site! It goes from millions do single digits in no time. How many people have POSTED in this thread? We have 296 replies. I will use 200 as probably a grossly exaggerated number of different responders. We have about 18K views of the thread at this point. We have about a dozen, maybe 20, posters with multiple answers in the thread - so I think the actual number of posters would be smaller than 200. A lot of those views are from those multiple posters, too. Every time I reply I increase the "views" count by about 5, since it takes me long enough to write this that I have to go back to the page again. And, I blip back and forth a bit, trying to make sure I am responding to what I thought I read.
We are not a large group. We might be considered a tiny bit influential, if you assume that we have 10 readers of the thread for every poster. Put that together with the original topic - which was a Vandevelde interview - and I can see why JV might have thought it worthwhile to jump in. But his point was that this is a small group. You aren't making the case otherwise by trying to discredit JV.
thehog said:Calm down.
Its British humor. We call it p1ss taking.
The same way JV thought it was funny to label the Clinic as a small group of "fanatics" of 12 posters.
No one was getting hurt, no one was being rude. All good fun.
festinagirl @festinagirl
@vaughters Zorxoli's statement that Drugs now “have a lower impact on the riders’ performance” seems key - not eradicated but controlled?
Jonathan Vaughters @Vaughters
@festinagirl I would say controlled to the point that it's almost irrelevant, from a pure performance perspective.
Seems like a reasonable statement to me. But I assume you have evidence to the contrary.Tyler'sTwin said:
Cavalier said:This is the same Vaughters who also linked an article claiming more crashes in the tour were partial evidence of less doping. Take it with a large grain of salt.
Climeon said:Who then said "sorry, but I see absolutely no historical/statistical correlation between crashes and doping/not doping."
Cavalier said:Well either he's trolling or there's some fairly odd schizophrenic behaviour going on there then as he introduced said article with: "Good news for the open minded and objective amongst you guys."
Tyler'sTwin said:
Ferminal said:What else is JV supposed to say? He's got a GT winner now...