what can cycling do to end speculation of doping?

May 31, 2010
541
0
0
ok guys, what would make you think cycling was clean?

you all have suspicions and innuendos - so what would silence these?
 
Pat McQuaid leaving the UCI and David Moncoutié replacing him.

Followed by an amnesty and actual clean riders (not white knights like Millar) being on the anti-doping panel.

Pierrick Fedrigo winning the Tour de France.

You remember when Linus Gerdemann was going to be chaperoned around the whole 21 days? How he would have somebody on hand at all times to see that he did it without any assistance? If every team leader did that.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Thee_chisa said:
ok guys, what would make you think cycling was clean?

you all have suspicions and innuendos - so what would silence these?
Take all anti-doping away from the UCI.

Anti-doping should be done by those who want to clean up sports, the UCI cannot be policeman and promoter.
 
Being upfront why certain staff is hired.

Being open to questions, at least to the point where nothing is given away to competition by answering them.

Posting training information.

Posting blood data.

Inviting people to follow the team during training camps and races.

Posting race power files.

Not calling people ****ers.

Now some things may be less possible than others, but I haven't really noticed much effort being made to make cycling more transparent.
 

Mount Megiddo

BANNED
Jul 5, 2012
40
0
0
Thee_chisa said:
ok guys, what would make you think cycling was clean?

you all have suspicions and innuendos - so what would silence these?
The use of suspicion and innuendo to attack a rider will never go away. But just as riders are judged for their conduct, we can judge those who use facade of doping to beat up a rider when there are no grounds for doing so. They are making a statement about their character, and Wiggins eminently expressed the words which are used to describe such characters. It's a matter of integrity.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
You remember when Linus Gerdemann was going to be chaperoned around the whole 21 days? How he would have somebody on hand at all times to see that he did it without any assistance? If every team leader did that.
This. If Wiggins gets so mad at people for insinuating doping, why not prove that they're wrong? He talks about sacrifices. Doing this would be a great sacrifice, but it could potentially save the sport and his reputation. That's a sacrifice worth taking.

I will certainly do it if I become a professional cyclist, but somehow, I kinda doubt that! (even though I do have a 3rd place from a local race this year on my palmares).
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Mount Megiddo said:
The use of suspicion and innuendo to attack a rider will never go away. But just as riders are judged for their conduct, we can judge those who use facade of doping to beat up a rider when there are no grounds for doing so. They are making a statement about their character, and Wiggins eminently expressed the words which are used to describe such characters. It's a matter of integrity.
Hi BPC, the question was actually how to make it go away, not defend Wiggins.
 
Jul 6, 2010
2,340
0
0
An independent testing body, completely removed from the UCI, and regular public posting of test results and biopass/blood profiles.

A bit harsh in the 'privacy' arena, but hey, you get to be a professional cyclist. Not a bad deal...
 

Mount Megiddo

BANNED
Jul 5, 2012
40
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
Hi BPC, the question was actually how to make it go away, not defend Wiggins.
I'm saying it will never go away because it's a method that can be used against someone they don't like. But we can make judgments on the people involved based on the case, i. e if it has reasonable grounds or not, and if the person involved is hypocritical on the subject.
 

Dr. Maserati

BANNED
Jun 19, 2009
13,250
1
0
Mount Megiddo said:
I'm saying it will never go away because it's a method that can be used against someone they don't like. But we can make judgments on the people involved based on the case, i. e if it has reasonable grounds or not, and if the person involved is hypocritical on the subject.
I know you are .... and you're missing the point.

If people believed in anti-doping or the process than that would remove any type of performance from being viewed as suspicious.

As an example, forget all the Team Sky stuff - ask yourself why is Scarponi allowed start the TdF? When he finishes he has to put on his best suit and explain to CONI why he is with Ferrari - and saying his gynecologist is not returning his calls will not be a good answer.
Why did Lampre send him? Why did the TdF organizers accept his entry?
 
Jun 28, 2009
568
0
0
How does the NFL get away with it year after year in the States? They have had like 2 suspensions for performance enhancing drugs in a league of super humans
 
Jun 25, 2012
283
0
0
roundabout said:
Being upfront why certain staff is hired.

Being open to questions, at least to the point where nothing is given away to competition by answering them.

Posting training information.

Posting blood data.

Inviting people to follow the team during training camps and races.

Posting race power files.

Not calling people ****ers.

Now some things may be less possible than others, but I haven't really noticed much effort being made to make cycling more transparent.
Idd that would help a bunch.

But they also need lifetime bans for offenders.. there should also be a ban on staff that was in doping scandals, I still see alot of team doctors thats dirty... its a shame.

They could also make drug research legal in cycling and let the riders be lab rats, thats seems to be something they do anyway.
 
Jun 25, 2012
283
0
0
Clemson Cycling said:
How does the NFL get away with it year after year in the States? They have had like 2 suspensions for performance enhancing drugs in a league of super humans
Its because its not fully a endurance sport (it got other things) its much much ore normal to see the suspective talk about individual endurance only sports.. this goes for swimming, running etc aswell..

The sad thing about cycling is that it makes all tactics obsolute, when some are doped to the gills.
 

Mount Megiddo

BANNED
Jul 5, 2012
40
0
0
Dr. Maserati said:
I know you are .... and you're missing the point.

If people believed in anti-doping or the process than that would remove any type of performance from being viewed as suspicious.

As an example, forget all the Team Sky stuff - ask yourself why is Scarponi allowed start the TdF? When he finishes he has to put on his best suit and explain to CONI why he is with Ferrari - and saying his gynecologist is not returning his calls will not be a good answer.
Why did Lampre send him? Why did the TdF organizers accept his entry?
I'm not missing the point. You're merely making a different point. Even if we lived in a perfect world where all the rules were being applied just how we wanted them to be, that would not stop some people from using the issue of dope to bash a rider like Wiggins that they dislike. BroDeal would still exist.
 
Jun 18, 2012
299
0
0
For me the solution is simple:

Require full disclosure:

1) The UCI needs a broom through it, and responsibilities taken away. Responsibility for drug testing needs to go to an external, independent body. Get this body to report weekly, on measures it's undertaking, new testing procedures, backdated testing.
2) Remove the statute of limitations. It's an irrelevance. If a test shows up 10 years down the track that someone was cheating under the rules of the day, but wasn't detectable then due to science, why should they get to keep their achievements due to an arbitrary time period?
3) Mandate the use of power-meters. Teams must post data within 2 hours of a stage on a dedicated website, publicly accessible. Small enough timeframe to prevent manipulation. I realise that people would say "but it may give away competition secrets" - but the reality is, it's one thing to be able to look at what your competitor did on one day, it's another thing to be able to do anything about it. But in the interests of entertainment, and the sport - why would it be an issue anyway? So you notice that the guy ahead of you on GC used a lot of power one day, and had an elevated heart rate, indicating he might not recover well, and you use it to your advantage the next day by attacking him - why is this a problem? Surely it's just adding to the entertainment and excitement of the sport?
4) Blood values and testing to be posted by relevant testing body on the same website as above (when available), aligned with performance data. I realise this may happen after the event due to time limitations.
5) Significantly increase OOC testing. If the numbers we've seen on here with regards to Armstrong are even close to accurate, getting tested roughly once a month OOC is so infrequent as to make it completely unworthwhile, and entirely dependant on chance.

The goal is organisational transparency, anti-doping transparency, and rider transparency. Don't like it as a rider? Find another career. We're talking a few years worth of inconvenience for something the common man would never get to experience but love to be able to.

One other thing:

6) Anyone caught doping, facilitating doping or with unexplainable blood markers automatically receives a lifetime ban. This is reducible to two years for a first offence providing the following condition is met: A rider must be able to prove from where he received the doping product(s), when he received them, and how he received them. He needs to show testing organisations how they were taken as well. That enables the sport to go after the problem at it's very source, and forces people to put their own livelihood before protecting others. Nobody will destroy their own career/earnings ahead of reporting a doctor or team manager.

Any rider who does report drug use/attempted use leading to a punishment is eligible for a financial reward.
 
Oct 25, 2010
3,049
2
0
What would make me think the sport was clean right now?

A young Frenchman (that we've at least heard of before.. for at least a few months), from a French team, winning the TDF.

For some reason, I believe France has gotten serious about the issue.
 
Honestly confront the past. Trying to improve the sport in secret for fear of economic fallout leads to the same distrust that was brought about by everyone in the sport trying their best to keep the extent of doping a secret.

And get rid of Fat McQuaid. The man is an idiot.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
Thee_chisa said:
ok guys, what would make you think cycling was clean?

you all have suspicions and innuendos - so what would silence these?
Very simple: stop doping. Stop making a mockery of the sport, and mistaking fans for imbeciles.

Fire Pat McQuaid. Turn anti-doping over to a reputable third party.

Prevail upon Amaury family to take clean racing seriously, under threat of nationalization by French government.

Those steps would do for starters.
 
May 14, 2010
5,306
2
0
Cavalier said:
For me the solution is simple:

Require full disclosure:

1) The UCI needs a broom through it, and responsibilities taken away. Responsibility for drug testing needs to go to an external, independent body. Get this body to report weekly, on measures it's undertaking, new testing procedures, backdated testing.
2) Remove the statute of limitations. It's an irrelevance. If a test shows up 10 years down the track that someone was cheating under the rules of the day, but wasn't detectable then due to science, why should they get to keep their achievements due to an arbitrary time period?
3) Mandate the use of power-meters. Teams must post data within 2 hours of a stage on a dedicated website, publicly accessible. Small enough timeframe to prevent manipulation. I realise that people would say "but it may give away competition secrets" - but the reality is, it's one thing to be able to look at what your competitor did on one day, it's another thing to be able to do anything about it. But in the interests of entertainment, and the sport - why would it be an issue anyway? So you notice that the guy ahead of you on GC used a lot of power one day, and had an elevated heart rate, indicating he might not recover well, and you use it to your advantage the next day by attacking him - why is this a problem? Surely it's just adding to the entertainment and excitement of the sport?
4) Blood values and testing to be posted by relevant testing body on the same website as above (when available), aligned with performance data. I realise this may happen after the event due to time limitations.
5) Significantly increase OOC testing. If the numbers we've seen on here with regards to Armstrong are even close to accurate, getting tested roughly once a month OOC is so infrequent as to make it completely unworthwhile, and entirely dependant on chance.

The goal is organisational transparency, anti-doping transparency, and rider transparency. Don't like it as a rider? Find another career. We're talking a few years worth of inconvenience for something the common man would never get to experience but love to be able to.

One other thing:

6) Anyone caught doping, facilitating doping or with unexplainable blood markers automatically receives a lifetime ban. This is reducible to two years for a first offence providing the following condition is met: A rider must be able to prove from where he received the doping product(s), when he received them, and how he received them. He needs to show testing organisations how they were taken as well. That enables the sport to go after the problem at it's very source, and forces people to put their own livelihood before protecting others. Nobody will destroy their own career/earnings ahead of reporting a doctor or team manager.

Any rider who does report drug use/attempted use leading to a punishment is eligible for a financial reward.
The suggestions above bear repeating.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
masking_agent The Clinic 11
BlueRoads The Clinic 2
B The Clinic 2
D The Clinic 10

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS