What % of the peloton dopes?

[Anonymous]

TIRED OF THIS TOPIC
When are you morons going to give up this BS and focus on something even slightly positive?. As soon as you can post anything that has proof that would hold up in court when you get sued, SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The survey is totally faulty because the first choice is not "I don't give a sh!t."

Ooh, she bites!

 

[mitch1]

Well, it might be influenced by other boards I actively participate in, but my policy is to stick to a few threads that cover the topic, and only start a new thread when the discussion is straying too far away from the initial topic. While here, it seems like every single new strain of thought or different angle on the same topic merits a new thread. Sometimes it ends up being a good move, but most of the times it's just the same old discussion all over again, with the same arguments made by the same people. And unfortunately this is especially the case with everything concerning doping and/or Lance Armstrong. As long as this Twitter-like thread starting doesn't change, every other thread will be choked imo.




Sorry for hijacking the thread btw
I wouldn't know about how much percent of the peloton uses PED's, but I think it all depends on what your definition of a PED is. I think there's a thin line and a whole grey area of semantics and arbitrary rules that make up the rules of what is considered doping, and what not. Every rider will be 'doped' to some extent, but some manage to stay within the accepted borders, while others cross them without being so much more jacked than others. A 'clean' peloton is impossible per definition imo, and not only in cycling.

Huh classic, you have the nerve to pay everyone out about continually going on about doping on the forums and then say sorry for hijacking the thread and then give your opinion! Irresistible and very interesting topic eh? Maybe that's why it's such a hot topic on forums at the moment.
Well, I encourage the discussion of the topic, even though I'm just a new member and therefore havn't done a whole lot of reading on the forum yet so wouldn't be ranting and raving about a topics popularity. Hey, if you don't want to know about those threads...DON"T read them...
Ok for my two cents worth, I believe a smaller percentage of the peleton dope than what alot of people do. For example I don't think armstrong dopes, I don't think Evans dopes. The obvious differance...one has won the tdf 7 times the other has placed top 3 several times but never won it. Another MAJOR differance, one gets accused of doping constantly, the other I don't think has ever been accused of it! So is everyone saying to win the tdf you have to dope but to get in the top three you don't??? hmmmm doesn't really make sense to me.. What does make sense to me is that both these athletes are incredibly naturally gifted cyclists and both train their butts off on top of being incredibly naturally gifted to get to the level they are at. The ONLY differance.... one is slightly MORE gifted than the other...plain and simple as that! Ask youself this question, 'why would Armstrong, after winning the tour 7 times and never been found positive for any banned drugs, come back and race without getting paid (ie. it has nothing to do with personal fortune), and risk his whole career unless he was clean..and he obviously hasn't come back just to make up numbers in the TDF, ie. he is out to win it (and I personally think he will) Extremely, extremely talented, period.

 

[Alex Simmons/RST]

I wouldn't know about how much percent of the peloton uses PED's, but I think it all depends on what your definition of a PED is. I think there's a thin line and a whole grey area of semantics and arbitrary rules that make up the rules of what is considered doping, and what not.

The definition of doping is pretty clear. It's whatever WADA and the relevant sport's governing bodies say it is. The list of prohibited sustances and methods is pretty clearly defined. Grey areas however might exist in how doping is policed.

My problem with most of these threads is they are so full of opinion and innuendo and very little substantive evidence. Of course absence of evidence is not evidence of absence but it doesn't make for very enlightening discussions, mostly just speculation and histrionics.

Hence I tend not to bother with them.

 

[Zoncolan]

Pfannberger's B sample positive for EPO

http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/pfannbergers-b-sample-positive-for-epo

 

[Angliru]

Nobody really knows so what's the point?

 

[Anonymous]

I would add that anyone who voted less than 90% generally has no idea of what's going on in pro cycling, or is lying about what he or she knows. I'm sure I'll get flamed for that, but well... the truth often is stranger than fiction, and often hurts. Only talking about the UCI pro peloton here.

it is a poll.. polls are a gauge of opinion, nothing more.

"you can have your own opinion but you can't bring your own fact to the table." Sen. Patrick Moynahan

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

Forums are a place of opinion!

Agree the doping threads, like Armstrong/Astana threads could be collapsed and combined.

The definition of doping is pretty clear. It's whatever WADA and the relevant sport's governing bodies say it is. The list of prohibited substances and methods is pretty clearly defined. Grey areas however might exist in how doping is policed.

I've stated this several times. Products not tested for, or not on banned lists; products once banned but not on most lists anymore; hyperbaric chambers; and maybe most of all, TUE's, etc, etc. The gray area is larger than people realize, and stretched as far as possible by many riders and teams.

I too grow weary of doping threads, and as soon as the Tour starts, unless there's a positive, or scandal, I'm going to really avoid talking about the topic.

Don't mind the poll. For some reason having 8 people say they think the peloton is clean puts a smile on my face.

 

[Ninety5rpm]

Nobody really knows so what's the point?

Sigh. The point is to find out what the distribution is among forum participants. I expected a clean division, which it was at first, but now it's becoming a pretty random distribution. Interesting.

 

[Amsterhammer]

Agree the doping threads, like Armstrong/Astana threads could be collapsed and combined.

That splendid improvement however, would require an actual mod to do some modding.

 

[Anonymous]

ive just looked at the list of mods and there stats.. im not sure some of them even know how the forum works..