- Apr 16, 2009
- 17,600
- 6,854
- 28,180
You know what could be a good analogy non-doping related (?), the way the soccer matches are played now versus the 70's and 80's. Now there are so much at stake that the teams play too defensively versus teams back then. That could be the reason why they scored a lot more goals than now. The schemes encouraged the teams to play offensively and therefore to score more goals.FoxxyBrown1111 said:That would mean the ampethamins/pot belges had the same (separating) impact as the hi-tech doping since 1990 had. But that´s contrary of all Järmann, Winnen, Andreu etc. said about Epo.
The only one other explanation can be: Tactics were different; go all out, attack early, ride like there is no tomorrow. This seems plausible to me if i compare saturdays zig-zags to the racing of the 80´s (add in a little mix of smaller talent pools, longer stages). Maybe that´s it.
...
In the NFL they were going the same direction. The Superbowl is too big and teams were investing too much time and money in playing defense. Then they change the rules to favor the quarterbacks. Therefore we get more touchdowns and more offense.
Maybe cycling should do something else other than banning radios to get the spectacle back to attackers. With the Biopassport in place they could be falling in a trap.
Now we are borderline OT.
