del1962 said:
I here a lot about a certain team started the arms race in doping, despite respected journalist David Walsh saying there is no organised doping on that team, anyway for those who hang their hat on that team started the arms race (apparently again), could they tell me when the arms race stopped.
This thread should not be about current doping (there are plenty of threads to discuss that), only when they think the so called arms race stopped.
Even if Sky are clean, there's only so long that the rest of the sport is going to be willing to be Sky's punching bags in the big stage races Sky send the A-team to. Especially with Sky constantly pushing the "marginal gains" and "we're so squeaky clean" agenda right down their throats, whilst winning races by power alone because they have shown themselves not to be the most adept tactically. A lot of teams may suspect something about Team Sky and think they need to dope to get even, or they may not suspect anything about Team Sky, but need to dope to get enough winnings to keep the team going/keep their careers going (remember Steve Houanard, the French Froome, only coming into the late season without a contract, he got busted for EPO he'd taken to try to get good enough showings to keep his career alive, rather than the podium of the Vuelta and a never-mentioned-before illness?), or for those that already were doping, they need to do more, cut more corners and be more aggressive with it to compete. Remember usually team winnings are divided amongst the riders, so when the wins are being bogarted by one team, that's a whole bunch of disappointed domestiques on every other team.
The sport is still cleaner than it was a decade ago. Guys like Sella, Riccò, Schumacher, Sayar, Santambrogio and di Luca are all very, very plainly obvious now. But if performance level changes like Froome's (very sudden, from pack fodder to pack destroyer) and Horner's (from decent climbing pro at 35 to GT winner at 42) happen with any regularity, others will want to get theirs as well.