• 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 @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!

Walsh Rips on the Bio Passport!

Page 7 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
is it doping? or evolution? when said being reach's a new benchmark, it gets
put into the collective memory. then anyone wishing to do better must go past the new standard. that has nothing to do with "doping" and everything to do with evolution. for your consideration.:cool:
 
Eva Maria said:
On what charge? What jurisdiction?

It is funny to see the fanboys suspend rational thought when it comes to their hero. Sanction or not the evidence is overwhelming.


On what charge, on what jurisdiction? You said that in court it would be a slam dunk. Not it is not a slam dunk anymore?

Are you saying that I am fanboy?


Deagol said:
Science is concerned with discovering the truth of the natural world, law is concerned with rules and procedures. Science strives to create predictable, repeatable results, Court Orders strive to set precedence. Court (jury) verdicts are open to debate (among jurors). Science tells you what happened, the courtroom tells you if you should decide to accept it or deny it.

Science is concerned with rules and procedures as much as law.


Sometimes I read http://www.sportsscientists.com and there is no dout that guys over there have no illusions regarding doping.
But they are very-very careful using the phrase " this is the fact". Just one very typical paragraph from theirs latest post: "Is this an indication of EPO use among elite distance runners? We don't know. It could be. But there are many other reasons that may explain why the records fell suddenly."


Dr. Maserati said:
Also - only one poster ever says "they all doped".
Occasionally in a debate about cycling in the 90's someone will say "they all doped", however when questioned further they clarify that it was the majority of top riders within that era - that is quite different.

Well, it was my impression, but I exaggerated, I admit. Here are lot of smart posters, though lot of lousy ones too.
 
Mar 18, 2009
2,442
0
0
Visit site
scribe said:
I look at this very objectively without passion one way or the other for the guy's character. If the guy comes out with an admission of guilt for '99 or others, it would send pretty big shock wave through the sport on the one hand and his legacy on the other. I appreciate the argument about the man's personal character with respect to this, but he is under no real pressure to admit as much. He probably figured outright and direct denial would nip it in the bud earlier than the coy approach. Is this really important to the greater public for future endeavor? It will certainly continue to be a very grey and difficult for people to define their positions.

More time between that era and the future will paint a clearer picture about what was really going on. Not just with Armstrong, but across the board. It has been obvious to many for some time. We are just now trying to figure out what to do with it.

Nice post. I am not sure what kind of impact a positive from Lance would have on either the sport or his legacy. For the sport, it would just be confirmation of what most people suspected. DiLuca is a good example - classics turned GT rider with exceptional results and he gets busted. Most of us shrug our shoulders and say did you expect anything else? DiLuca is also a good example of what happens to a legacy. His is not so prominent and I am not sure if his positive doping results has had a negative, positive or no effect on his fund raising for earthquake victims, but at least there has been no press about this from North American news agencies. So there is hope that the good athletes do will not be ruined by their doping practices.
 
Jun 18, 2009
1,086
1
0
Visit site
elapid said:
Nice post. I am not sure what kind of impact a positive from Lance would have on either the sport or his legacy. For the sport, it would just be confirmation of what most people suspected. DiLuca is a good example - classics turned GT rider with exceptional results and he gets busted. Most of us shrug our shoulders and say did you expect anything else? DiLuca is also a good example of what happens to a legacy. His is not so prominent and I am not sure if his positive doping results has had a negative, positive or no effect on his fund raising for earthquake victims, but at least there has been no press about this from North American news agencies. So there is hope that the good athletes do will not be ruined by their doping practices.

One difference (at least for me :D) between Lance and DiLuca is that lance seems to be a lot more polarizing. You either love him or you hate him. That doesn't seem so for DiLuca. Maybe some of the antics that Lance has pulled (Simeoni incident, feud with Contador this year etc.), or just his success '99-'05 has contributed to this. Maybe it is a different situation in Italy, but at least here in the US, if Lance does test positive at some point, a lot of people are going to be extremely happy and a lot of people are going to be extremely upset. That didn't seem to be the case with DiLuca.
 
May 7, 2009
1,282
0
0
Visit site
Cobber said:
One difference (at least for me :D) between Lance and DiLuca is that lance seems to be a lot more polarizing. You either love him or you hate him. That doesn't seem so for DiLuca. Maybe some of the antics that Lance has pulled (Simeoni incident, feud with Contador this year etc.), or just his success '99-'05 has contributed to this. Maybe it is a different situation in Italy, but at least here in the US, if Lance does test positive at some point, a lot of people are going to be extremely happy and a lot of people are going to be extremely upset. That didn't seem to be the case with DiLuca.

For the record, there are SOME of us who neither love or hate LA. I am one of them. But, it seems like most people do fall into one camp or the other.
In the U.S., it seems that the cycling industry/marketing machine has put all their eggs in one basket (that, of course being Lance) and we do not hear about any other US riders in the mainstream media- well at least not much. There are a few mentions of others, but nothing close to the Lance overload we get here. Levi might be a distant second? If he (LA) was caught, it could be like a house of cards tumbing down. Seems like we would be better to spread out our attention so if one falls, that doesn't mean the whole thing is compromised in the minds of the public. When Tyler Hamilton was effectivly ejected from the sport, the news was nothing to what it would have been if the rider was LA.
 
Jun 16, 2009
346
0
0
Visit site
scribe said:
I hope not. Doping culture certainly isn't as acceptable as it once was and that is a good start. How to clean it up is the responsibilities of all professionals involved.

Your point about all professionals being involved in finding a response to the drug problem is a good one.

I look at the situation from a combination of fan, participant, friend of professional athletes (in a range of sports) and - and sorry about this one folks - the background of my legal training.

In english based legal systems there's a concept called contributory negligence. Put simply it's about seeing all parties who are responsible for a particular harm and working out what level of responsibility each party takes.

Applying the same idea to drugs in cycling - or in fact any sport - you find what to my mind is a pretty simple answer of why the current focus only on athletes doesn't work. My simple analysis runs of responsibility runs something like:
- athletes - obvious issue of personal responsibility and choice. But even within that, there are questions about education and their perception of need and their perception of their future/post-competition prospects that need to be addressed.
- fans - unrealistic expectations of their sporting idols and expectations of constant improvements even if natural human limits are being surpassed, in part because many fans are "enthusiasts" rather than "fanatics". Examples include the expectations that GC contenders wont have a down day in a grand tour (contrast to the late 80's - early 90's) and the ever increasing speeds in a number of races.
- media - although there is a bit more press for anti-PED issues and riders supporting that movement, in general, the media is as willingly blind as many fans. Anyone who had the misfortune to sit through Versus coverage of the Tour (my first year in North America - and from here on out I'm watching French or English Eurosport on my computer) will know what I'm talking about. The media's movitation is to sell copy and advertising space. It creates icons to do that. Typically as a body it doesn't look particularly deeply at who it uses to create the profile it wants - as any number of public meltdowns of "stars" demonstrates. Combine that with what appears to be a real dearth of expert journos (in the english language media at least) and a general pre-occupation with sound bite reporting and the result is an environment where PED's are mostly quietly ignored.
- managers - ranging from turning a blind eye to complicit in PED use. I'd argue that these people have a "duty of care" to their riders. In any other employment field, employers have occupational health and safety responsibilities, why not in pro sports? Allowing or encouraging the use of PED's - which includes not having sufficient internal controls to catch abuse - is to my mind a dereliction of that duty. Jeez, even NZ rugby teams put in place programs to help their pro players build a career beyond their time at the top of their sport - if they can do it, why can't these multi-million dollar pro teams look after their riders better?
- sponsors - some just don't care how their sponsored athletes get the results. One friend was even encouraged by a very, very well known brand to start taking PED's if they wanted to see their sponsorship move to a higher level! In those countries where use of PED's is illegal, the corporation should to my mind be considered an accessory to a crime and directors/officers of the company should be liable for imprisonment - in the same way as they are under health and safety and environmental legislation. And again, as the athlete is a contractor to the sponsor - providing advertising services both on the "field of play" and at events - to my mind the sponsors owe the athletes a duty of care - which again comes into occupational safety.
- race/event organisers - the basic duty here is again akin to workplace safety. An event that encourages widespread PED use because of the difficulty of the course/event or an organiser who fails to provide sufficient controls of their own (irrespective of official testing) is to my mind directly analogous to a factory owner who operates machines without guards, has broken walkways, exposed wires etc. We've seen riders boycott stages and races for safety reasons - what I am talking about is an extension of the same sort of protest on the grounds of PEDs.
- organising bodies - to my mind, the role of the UCI and IOC and the various national federations is like that of a government certifying organisation. They either are - or should be - assessing and certifying events. I am not sure what criteria they assess on, but I believe that an expansion to include various criteria related to PED use should be considered. What they are doing at the moment would be like a national transport certifying agency looking at a new model car and having a certification list that excluded brakes and safety belts.

Ok, so this is getting overly long (apologies for that ... but as you can probably guess, it's something I'm kinda passionate about) - but even so I recognise that I've only skimmed the surface of the issue ... So please take the lack of discussion on establishing evidence etc in that light (ie., rather than dismissing the argument because of it).

I will conclude by saying that any criminology student will tell you that focusing only on making criminals (either literally or in a sporting sense) out of the riders wont ever fix the problem of PEDs when you have the network of pressure that I've described here behind them. The solution as I see it is to build a multi-layered framework that combines education, contracts, regulation and sanctions that are specific to each of these levels. (Again, space prohibits expansion ...) It'll take a generation or so to achieve the desired ends and will result in some pretty major blood spilling in the meantime - but I believe we'd get to where most people would rather be if we could implement something like this.

Again apologies for the length - but like I say, it's something I'm passionate about .... (jeez, if I could get the money I'd love to do a PhD or write more on this!!) :)
 
Jun 18, 2009
2,079
2
0
Visit site
TheArbiter said:
The ToF is the hardest Tour in the world. He won it seven years in a row. It's up to other riders if they want to enter the less hard races and use that as an excuse for not winning the Tof.

Huh? LA said the hardest stage he's ever done in his life was in this year's Giro. How would one even begin to compare the TDF and Giro for "hardness"?

Winning the TDF doesn't mean you dominate the sport. Eddy Merckx dominated the sport. LA dominated one race. Big difference.
 
Mar 19, 2009
1,311
0
0
Visit site
slcbiker said:
Virenque should be getting just as much of this criticism as LA.
Virenque was forced to make a confession after being grilled by cops for hours without food & water.

Lance is still racing & doping. Virenque is not. Also, correct me if I'm wrong; Walsh did not critisize Virenque's TV popularity as showcasing where doping gets a talented rider?