When can we start to believe?

[Galic Ho]

kohl claimed that all the other gc riders were doped up. He only made all these claims after he tested positive. He obviously feels picked on as he tested positive for doping and the others didn't. that's sour grapes.

Why would anyone who was taking a serious crack at doping come forward before they were caught and say what is going on? They're defrauding the ideal sporting image. Only someone who has deep remorse and strong personal values would come forward before they are clean. Kohl and every other drug cheat/PED user has inherent reason to come forward to prove they don't have sour grapes. Yes some do, but not here. Your idea of sour grapes is an example of circular logic...it doesn't make sense when you listen to the tone and language Kohl has used. Has he said, "its $h!t I was caught when they weren't" or "this isn't fair"? I think he has more than realised he wasn't picked on. Kohl was caught later than Ricco for abusing the same supposedly undetectable drug. Schumacher may fit the sour grapes bill, but not Kohl. He realises the ruse is up and has been forthcoming with what he used and how he evaded being caught. Kohl admitted he should have been busted numerous times...hardly the stuff of sour grapes.

 

[karlboss]

When you or someone you trust 100% not to lie to you wins clean. Remembering family members have been lied to about this very issue.
The bio passport is a good idea, I just hate that the UCI line seems to be that it is perfect, when it clearly isn't. For something like the passport to work there needs to be loads of reliable data collected and it isn't possible. How do they know who is clean to establish their baselines?

 

[Fourier]

Desperate times call for desperate measures? maybe or maybe not. How about a crazy idea (don't threaten to cut my head off).
How about a semi-amnesty for cases like Puerto. I mean: allow implicated riders to come clean about what they did (...do) and think of a somewhat reduced sentence. I know it may be unfair to those who served complete suspensions but it may be better than no suspension at all.
(strip away racing results, reduced 1 year suspension.... any suggestions?)
To start believing, cycling needs to first get out of the current state of denial regarding cases like Puerto.

 

[gjdavis60]

Fernando Alonzo will bring integrity back to pro cycling when he starts up his team. Then we can all start to believe again.

Flavio Briatore for DS! Pat Symonds for technical director!!

______________________________________
"Well, then it's not cheating, is it? If nobody finds out?'' -Danica Patrick

 

[BigBoat]

Hi, have been reading CN forum for ages, but first post, so here goes. I recall this comment having been made a few times, but only in other threads and never really discussed specifically to my mind (couldn't find it in a search either). Sorry if this has already been covered somewhere and I have missed it, but I'll put it out there anyway.

My question is, "When do we start to believe cycling is clean?"

I just read the Basso thread, and for the record, I think he was doped in 06. However, I want to believe he's clean now, and to my mind, his results in the Giro and the Vuelta reflect those of a very good rider who now doesn't have that extra edge. That's not to say I 100% believe he's clean, just that his results to my mind are possible.

Same with Evans - I just re-read the thread that big boat started on him, and while my mind isn't yet made up, some of the points raised suggest that his results are maybe within the realms of possibility for a clean rider. The obvious exception was this year's tour, and whilst the cynics would say a bad dose made him sick, or that he was too scared to dope so we saw his true colours and ability, what about the argument that maybe it just shows that if you're clean, but not 100% mentally fit and things go wrong, you'll suffer???



.

ALL THE RIDERS suffer big time...Doped heavily or not doped so much. Its a hard sport. ALL the top riders are doped to some degree....Doping especiall red cell jacking makes a big big big difference. Scientific studies published and read by the many prove this. People in the sport LIE!! Doctors and physiologists who do interviews with cycling journalists have lied or not been truthful about how effective doping is. Guess what, a double blind study proved that 6 weeks of loading epo increases the average person
s sustainable power output by 13%. That makes your all out 5 minute repeats power become your 50-60 minute all out power. Another few weeks and going all the way up crit wise would give a 20% boost.

There are no "FREAKS" in pro cycling that are way more talented than all the top talents competing on that Pro Tour. COntrary to belief Armstrong, or Evans are no any more taletned that anybody else in the top 30-40. All are within 10 points of one another talent wise.

It all boils down to who responds best to drug therapy and who can dope the highest. There are no top guys trying to race clean who are competitive for the top stage race G.C.'s...No wiggins weight loss does not make him climb at 6.6 watts per kilo for 30-40 minute periods. If he was clean he'd need to weigh 120 pounds in order to finish that high with his undoped FTP... Get on your bike and see how long you can hold 420 watts....I bet the average competitive rider here cant do it for 2 minutes even! Please stop being dumb and put things into perspective...Just try it. Get on a bike and start pedaling down the highway at 400-440 watts.

If Evans was clean he'd be a nobody. He'd not make the top 50 perhaps. It all depends on how many come in blood doping. Thats huge. If only a few come in doped than clean riders maybe could do better. Last year the powe values were way off what they are this year, WAY off!!! Things dont suddenly change in 9 months. There's no blood volume testing right now, and so its possible to blood dope up to 55% crit and hemodilute down on regular saline, albumin, etc--THAT right there makes it impossible for clean riders to be competitive in a 3 week stage race against top talents.

 

[shawnrohrbach]

Hi, have been reading CN forum for ages, but first post, so here goes. I recall this comment having been made a few times, but only in other threads and never really discussed specifically to my mind (couldn't find it in a search either). Sorry if this has already been covered somewhere and I have missed it, but I'll put it out there anyway.

My question is, "When do we start to believe cycling is clean?"

I just read the Basso thread, and for the record, I think he was doped in 06. However, I want to believe he's clean now, and to my mind, his results in the Giro and the Vuelta reflect those of a very good rider who now doesn't have that extra edge. That's not to say I 100% believe he's clean, just that his results to my mind are possible.

Same with Evans - I just re-read the thread that big boat started on him, and while my mind isn't yet made up, some of the points raised suggest that his results are maybe within the realms of possibility for a clean rider. The obvious exception was this year's tour, and whilst the cynics would say a bad dose made him sick, or that he was too scared to dope so we saw his true colours and ability, what about the argument that maybe it just shows that if you're clean, but not 100% mentally fit and things go wrong, you'll suffer???

My point is that we're all very quick to jump to the negative explanation whether it be to explain away a good performance (he's on dope) or a bad one (he took a bad dose, or is not doped like usual, or the other guys are more heavily doped etc.) It almost doesn't matter what happens, it seems like the only explanation is drugs.

This forum has opened my eyes, and made me extremely cynical of ANY performance, so what is going to take to make me believe?

This post is not about invdividuals. Even though I just used Evans and Basso as examples, I don't really want to discuss them because it has been done. But look at some other points. Once I though it would help if we get a new guard of winners coming through, and more variety of winners because it would suggest that the stranglehold of top doctors had been broken and guys can't be good 24/7/365 anymore thanks to super recovery dope - but when it happens at the Vuelta (see thread I think it was called "Unusual stat at this year's Vuelta), it still isn't enough to convince some (or me for that matter).

It is right that we question, and get suspicious when someone does something crazy good (ala Ricco and Schumacher and Kohl) but where do we draw the line, and what is it going to take to stop us reaching for the drugs explanation and start reaching for the "man he trained hard for this" or the "he's just a better cyclist than that guy" or the "he just wasn't good enough today" explanations (and actually believe them too)

Sorry for the long post, just wanted to get this off my chest, and BTW, this is definitely not meant to be a pro-Evans, Basso, Armstrong, or anyone else for that matter argument, it is just a question.

I think we are way beyond the point of no return. There are many young cyclists, amateurs and I am certain even a few professionals for whom winning is not a big deal and doping just does not make any sense. But, by and large, when the competition counts (for money, fame, trophies, scholarships, sponsorships, etc) there is doping. While this doesn't count as serious, technical doping, I watched a juniors cyclocross in Seattle two years ago between 11-12 y/o boys, and the guy who won had chugged three espressos before the race. He knew he would get a jolt and his justification was since he didn't think his body was any stronger than the competition, the espresso would give him the edge. He was proud of it and so was his father who bought him the espressos. He got another trophy for his father to be proud of.

 

[SpeedWay]

Don't get too hung up on Willow22, life's too short. Be careful not to become one of the valiant Don Quixote's whose posts predominate this forum. You'll end up becoming a cynical jaded character who may stop watching and possibly miss your generations Puy de Dome. When it gets to be too much just remember cheating's been around since men first started competing many millennia ago.
Mix that in with power and money and you'll see these well meaning Quixote's, both past and present, never had a chance. This current nonsense is a small bump in the road. Once futuristic regenerative medicine gets here most of these Quixote's will be committing seppuku anyway. Choose reality, not fantasy.

 

[BikeCentric]

Don't get too hung up on Willow22, life's too short. Be careful not to become one of the valiant Don Quixote's whose posts predominate this forum. You'll end up becoming a cynical jaded character who may stop watching and possibly miss your generations Puy de Dome. When it gets to be too much just remember cheating's been around since men first started competing many millennia ago.
Mix that in with power and money and you'll see these well meaning Quixote's, both past and present, never had a chance. This current nonsense is a small bump in the road. Once futuristic regenerative medicine gets here most of these Quixote's will be committing seppuku anyway. Choose reality, not fantasy.

So Speedway finally reveals what he is: a fan of doping. Not a fan of cycling, not a fan of sports, and certainly not reality.

 

[red_explosions]

Don't get too hung up on Willow22, life's too short. Be careful not to become one of the valiant Don Quixote's whose posts predominate this forum. You'll end up becoming a cynical jaded character who may stop watching and possibly miss your generations Puy de Dome. When it gets to be too much just remember cheating's been around since men first started competing many millennia ago.
Mix that in with power and money and you'll see these well meaning Quixote's, both past and present, never had a chance. This current nonsense is a small bump in the road. Once futuristic regenerative medicine gets here most of these Quixote's will be committing seppuku anyway. Choose reality, not fantasy.

I agree, bring it on. Guys jacked at 70% climbing Alpe d'Huez in 17 minutes. Credibility man!

 

[usedtobefast]

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2009/09/28/090928fa_fact_specter

 

[Anonymous]

Don't get too hung up on Willow22, life's too short. Be careful not to become one of the valiant Don Quixote's whose posts predominate this forum. You'll end up becoming a cynical jaded character who may stop watching and possibly miss your generations Puy de Dome. When it gets to be too much just remember cheating's been around since men first started competing many millennia ago.
Mix that in with power and money and you'll see these well meaning Quixote's, both past and present, never had a chance. This current nonsense is a small bump in the road. Once futuristic regenerative medicine gets here most of these Quixote's will be committing seppuku anyway. Choose reality, not fantasy.

Unfortunately, as has always been, most will choose the herd mentality over personal integrity. Moo for us.

 

[ludwig]

ALL THE RIDERS suffer big time...Doped heavily or not doped so much. Its a hard sport. ALL the top riders are doped to some degree....Doping especiall red cell jacking makes a big big big difference. Scientific studies published and read by the many prove this. People in the sport LIE!! Doctors and physiologists who do interviews with cycling journalists have lied or not been truthful about how effective doping is. Guess what, a double blind study proved that 6 weeks of loading epo increases the average person
s sustainable power output by 13%. That makes your all out 5 minute repeats power become your 50-60 minute all out power. Another few weeks and going all the way up crit wise would give a 20% boost.

There are no "FREAKS" in pro cycling that are way more talented than all the top talents competing on that Pro Tour. COntrary to belief Armstrong, or Evans are no any more taletned that anybody else in the top 30-40. All are within 10 points of one another talent wise.

It all boils down to who responds best to drug therapy and who can dope the highest. There are no top guys trying to race clean who are competitive for the top stage race G.C.'s...No wiggins weight loss does not make him climb at 6.6 watts per kilo for 30-40 minute periods. If he was clean he'd need to weigh 120 pounds in order to finish that high with his undoped FTP... Get on your bike and see how long you can hold 420 watts....I bet the average competitive rider here cant do it for 2 minutes even! Please stop being dumb and put things into perspective...Just try it. Get on a bike and start pedaling down the highway at 400-440 watts.

If Evans was clean he'd be a nobody. He'd not make the top 50 perhaps. It all depends on how many come in blood doping. Thats huge. If only a few come in doped than clean riders maybe could do better. Last year the powe values were way off what they are this year, WAY off!!! Things dont suddenly change in 9 months. There's no blood volume testing right now, and so its possible to blood dope up to 55% crit and hemodilute down on regular saline, albumin, etc--THAT right there makes it impossible for clean riders to be competitive in a 3 week stage race against top talents.

Well said.

Instead of having to state and debate this stuff over and over, what we need is a sticky thread with lots of links to the scientific evidence on the effect of doping on performance. That, along with information on the volumes of evidence of a code of silence on doping, should go a long way towards educating newbies.

My advice is enjoy cycling but don't get caught up in the bull**** regarding who is clean and who isn't. All the top riders dope--cycling has always been dope-ridden.

 

[Anonymous]

Well said.

Instead of having to state and debate this stuff over and over, what we need is a sticky thread with lots of links to the scientific evidence on the effect of doping on performance. That, along with information on the volumes of evidence of a code of silence on doping, should go a long way towards educating newbies.

My advice is enjoy cycling but don't get caught up in the bull**** regarding who is clean and who isn't. All the top riders dope--cycling has always been dope-ridden.

+1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_doping_cases_in_cycling

 

[Bumeington]

ALL THE RIDERS suffer big time...Doped heavily or not doped so much. Its a hard sport. ALL the top riders are doped to some degree....Doping especiall red cell jacking makes a big big big difference. Scientific studies published and read by the many prove this. People in the sport LIE!! Doctors and physiologists who do interviews with cycling journalists have lied or not been truthful about how effective doping is. Guess what, a double blind study proved that 6 weeks of loading epo increases the average person
s sustainable power output by 13%. That makes your all out 5 minute repeats power become your 50-60 minute all out power. Another few weeks and going all the way up crit wise would give a 20% boost.

There are no "FREAKS" in pro cycling that are way more talented than all the top talents competing on that Pro Tour. COntrary to belief Armstrong, or Evans are no any more taletned that anybody else in the top 30-40. All are within 10 points of one another talent wise.

It all boils down to who responds best to drug therapy and who can dope the highest. There are no top guys trying to race clean who are competitive for the top stage race G.C.'s...No wiggins weight loss does not make him climb at 6.6 watts per kilo for 30-40 minute periods. If he was clean he'd need to weigh 120 pounds in order to finish that high with his undoped FTP... Get on your bike and see how long you can hold 420 watts....I bet the average competitive rider here cant do it for 2 minutes even! Please stop being dumb and put things into perspective...Just try it. Get on a bike and start pedaling down the highway at 400-440 watts.

If Evans was clean he'd be a nobody. He'd not make the top 50 perhaps. It all depends on how many come in blood doping. Thats huge. If only a few come in doped than clean riders maybe could do better. Last year the powe values were way off what they are this year, WAY off!!! Things dont suddenly change in 9 months. There's no blood volume testing right now, and so its possible to blood dope up to 55% crit and hemodilute down on regular saline, albumin, etc--THAT right there makes it impossible for clean riders to be competitive in a 3 week stage race against top talents.

Whilst I'm certainly not in denial about the prevelance of doping in the pro peloton, some of your arguments are ridiculous. The fact you suggest to try riding at a wattage comparable to the top pros as a way of confirming that that kind of power is impossible without doping is insane. Of course it's not possible for us, with or without doping.

 

[R.0.t.O]

ALL THE RIDERS suffer big time...Doped heavily or not doped so much. Its a hard sport. ALL the top riders are doped to some degree....Doping especiall red cell jacking makes a big big big difference. Scientific studies published and read by the many prove this. People in the sport LIE!! Doctors and physiologists who do interviews with cycling journalists have lied or not been truthful about how effective doping is. Guess what, a double blind study proved that 6 weeks of loading epo increases the average person
s sustainable power output by 13%. That makes your all out 5 minute repeats power become your 50-60 minute all out power. Another few weeks and going all the way up crit wise would give a 20% boost.

There are no "FREAKS" in pro cycling that are way more talented than all the top talents competing on that Pro Tour. COntrary to belief Armstrong, or Evans are no any more taletned that anybody else in the top 30-40. All are within 10 points of one another talent wise.

It all boils down to who responds best to drug therapy and who can dope the highest. There are no top guys trying to race clean who are competitive for the top stage race G.C.'s...No wiggins weight loss does not make him climb at 6.6 watts per kilo for 30-40 minute periods. If he was clean he'd need to weigh 120 pounds in order to finish that high with his undoped FTP... Get on your bike and see how long you can hold 420 watts....I bet the average competitive rider here cant do it for 2 minutes even! Please stop being dumb and put things into perspective...Just try it. Get on a bike and start pedaling down the highway at 400-440 watts.

If Evans was clean he'd be a nobody. He'd not make the top 50 perhaps. It all depends on how many come in blood doping. Thats huge. If only a few come in doped than clean riders maybe could do better. Last year the powe values were way off what they are this year, WAY off!!! Things dont suddenly change in 9 months. There's no blood volume testing right now, and so its possible to blood dope up to 55% crit and hemodilute down on regular saline, albumin, etc--THAT right there makes it impossible for clean riders to be competitive in a 3 week stage race against top talents.

No argument from me with the conclusion that everybody dopes. It's only logical - why give up any advantage to your competitors? But I think you're overstating things here. For example I know from my own power data as a Cat 2 rider that the types of absolute power and W/kg you quote aren't that far outside my range. If you asked me to ride "down the highway" at 400W I would get at least 10minutes up the road from you (roughly 73kg mass), and I'm not particularly naturally talented and don't train anything like full-time. To extend to a full-time professional athlete maintaining that for 3 to 4 times as long isn't unbelievable to me. I'm really more impressed with the recovery programmes than the absolute performance - that they keep putting in those performances day after day is a far more compelling argument for doping than any of the absolute numbers.

For the OP. I'll start to believe when there is a complete overhaul at the UCI and not before.

 

[ludwig]

For the OP. I'll start to believe when there is a complete overhaul at the UCI and not before.

True dat. The UCI leadership has 0 credibility. Essentially the same dudes are running the sport as pre-Festina--thats 11 years of covering up the doping. How can you believe when the sport's leadership is invested in doping and determined to hide their past as facilitators?

But even when the UCI is reformed there will still be doping. The only solution is a massive advance in anti-doping science and a comprehensive testing regime, which would require significant funding.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

True dat. The UCI leadership has 0 credibility. Essentially the same dudes are running the sport as pre-Festina--thats 11 years of covering up the doping. How can you believe when the sport's leadership is invested in doping and determined to hide their past as facilitators?

But even when the UCI is reformed there will still be doping. The only solution is a massive advance in anti-doping science and a comprehensive testing regime, which would require significant funding.

Good points - while certain elements within the UCI needs reform the most significant step would be to take the anti-doping responsibilities away from the UCI altogether.

This is also true of all other sporting federations - and indeed if the resourses currently used by each individually were pooled together it could make for better value for the funding of anti-doping measures.

Certainly there will always be doping - but if the bio-passport was used to its potential and an independent body in charge of anti-doping it could significantly limit the advantages to doping.