- Jul 18, 2010
- 1,279
- 26
- 10,530
None of the above.
What bothers me most is UCI/WADA putting on a front and expecting us to believe they have the matter of PEDs under control. Anybody who doesn't live life looking at the inside of their own large intestine knows that if the unfettered doping that characterised the Pharmstrong era ever were to come to an end, there should be a quite conspicuous accompanying dip in performance. Neither the UCI nor WADA will have to tell us when this comes to pass because we will see it for ourselves.
What's worse than doping, worse even than the accused cyclist lying about doping, or even a phony "mea culpa," is the sanctioning body lying about its control of the doping. Which could be because there's more money to be made in promoting (doped) sport than in catching doped athletes.
If there is a saving grace, it's that this isn't simply a cycling problem. It's a world sport problem. SOTA doping is more advanced than SOTA PEDs detection.
What bothers me most is UCI/WADA putting on a front and expecting us to believe they have the matter of PEDs under control. Anybody who doesn't live life looking at the inside of their own large intestine knows that if the unfettered doping that characterised the Pharmstrong era ever were to come to an end, there should be a quite conspicuous accompanying dip in performance. Neither the UCI nor WADA will have to tell us when this comes to pass because we will see it for ourselves.
What's worse than doping, worse even than the accused cyclist lying about doping, or even a phony "mea culpa," is the sanctioning body lying about its control of the doping. Which could be because there's more money to be made in promoting (doped) sport than in catching doped athletes.
If there is a saving grace, it's that this isn't simply a cycling problem. It's a world sport problem. SOTA doping is more advanced than SOTA PEDs detection.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram