• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Which is the worst form of cheating?

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
If the worst thing is mechanical doping, then obviously the motors in the bike, but also drafting + sticky bidon + medical treatment longer than necessary is the worst thing, no?
So e.g. if Demare is caught hanging onto the car, he should get the same punishment as Femke VDD (a lifelong ban)...

(ps: I think a lifelong ban is too much, obviously, and am trying to find some good reasons not to give her a lifelong ban, because I feel there is a lot of hypocrisy when judging on punishments).
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Re:

aphronesis said:
Maybe, but that "first time" still continues to hold within it all the previous potential of the just prior valid and legitimate sport. So where, historically, would the line be across sport(s) and/or individuals between various "first times" and "each time"?

yeah, that was a weakness of the maxim, I needed to define my hypothesis as the individual athlete, in an individual hypothetical sport.
 
Mar 15, 2016
520
0
0
Visit site
oldcrank said:
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.
Well, in Australian professional athletics there is:
5)"inconsistent racing"

which used to be called 'running dead'...but usually done in a slightly more subtle manner. :)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...dering-rules-changes-talia-martin-win/7280512

They are too generous with that description. It should be called "trolling" or "extreme sandbagging".

Which category does Demare's MSR win fit into?
 
Feb 6, 2016
1,213
0
0
Visit site
trucido said:
oldcrank said:
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.
Well, in Australian professional athletics there is:
5)"inconsistent racing"

which used to be called 'running dead'...but usually done in a slightly more subtle manner. :)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...dering-rules-changes-talia-martin-win/7280512

They are too generous with that description. It should be called "trolling" or "extreme sandbagging".

Which category does Demare's MSR win fit into?

I'd change 'hidden motors' to the general 'use of proscribed equipment'; motors, bike below the weight limit (if that's still a thing), and indeed cars. Obviously there's a variety of severity within that category, from 'minor infringement' to 'no longer cycling'.
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
oldcrank said:
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.
Well, in Australian professional athletics there is:
5)"inconsistent racing"

which used to be called 'running dead'...but usually done in a slightly more subtle manner. :)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-...dering-rules-changes-talia-martin-win/7280512
basically Femke mk deux. she ran with the from of a professional runner running in the olympics, brilliant form, runs like the wind, like she stole something, which she was in the mode of.

I think the Aths Vic chief won the gift in 2002, and he was also sanctioned for inconsistent racing or improvement. Then there is the retirement of Peter peptides Moody and cobalt, he will be back in 6 months surely.
 
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.

I don't know how others feel, but I'm beginning to think that good old-fashioned doping doesn't look so bad compared to the alternatives. At least the strongest (strength defined mentally as well as physically) rider wins, albeit strength is no longer the product of just genetics and training.


I think #4 overrides everything else. Once the organization management sells out there is no credibility for any participant. Clean riders can't win without "questions". #3 is based on opportunity and pretty much works with #4. 1,2 will always be replaced by something else if they are actually eradicated. Athletes will be grafting limbs somewhere in the future....
 
Oldermanish said:
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.

I don't know how others feel, but I'm beginning to think that good old-fashioned doping doesn't look so bad compared to the alternatives. At least the strongest (strength defined mentally as well as physically) rider wins, albeit strength is no longer the product of just genetics and training.

I think #4 overrides everything else. Once the organization management sells out there is no credibility for any participant. Clean riders can't win without "questions". #3 is based on opportunity and pretty much works with #4. 1,2 will always be replaced by something else if they are actually eradicated. Athletes will be grafting limbs somewhere in the future....

Talking of the authorities cutting deals they should not do - how did Cookson get on with sending that cheque of the UCI members money to Hein ? Did Hein ever get it or is he going "legal" for his £40,000 or whatever it was ?

Firstly we had Cookson saying that in the interests of transparency he was bringing in a CEO to manage the executive decisions to remove the President's position from day to day meddling then, there he was negotiating expense claims with the past president and lifelong honary president, that is unless he had Gibb in a box under the table. What was Cookson doing agreeing to pay Verbruggen's legal fees ? How dodgy was that ?

None of that came out until Hein went public with asking for his cheque. What the heck was Cookson thinking when he cut the deal ?

If Cookson can cut a deal like that and attempt to keep it quiet, what else can he do ?

All smacks of the time John Major, as UK Prime Minister, hid an advisor under the table in negotiations because he did not want to be outwitted or engaged on something he would c o c k up.

Gibby to Brian - one pull on the trouser leg means agree to what Hein says, two means disagree.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20450795
 
Jul 23, 2015
73
0
0
Visit site
Merckx index said:
Well, we have:

1) doping
2) hidden motors
3) paying off competitors to let you win
4) making deals with the authorities to let you win

Have I left out any? Others please add to this list as you see fit.

I don't know how others feel, but I'm beginning to think that good old-fashioned doping doesn't look so bad compared to the alternatives. At least the strongest (strength defined mentally as well as physically) rider wins, albeit strength is no longer the product of just genetics and training.
What about cheating on the missus with her sister, then sending her videos of you in the act after you've emptied the joint bank account and fled to a tropical paradise without an extradition treaty ? I reckon that's pretty bad........

..........other than that, having a wind up motor in the bike............. !
 
Mar 13, 2009
16,854
1
0
Visit site
Re:

Libertine Seguros said:
It depends on the person's position relative to the cheating, surely.

For a rider, a motor is more antithetical to the sport than doping; once motors are involved it's no longer cycling as we know it, whereas doping is cheating but the basic premise of the sport of cycling remains intact. And some doping will be perceived as worse than others, too. Two particular examples spring to mind:
- taking a corner-cutting "means to an end" product such as Duval or Bastianelli taking appetite suppressants I see as more "indirect" performance enhancement than guzzling EPO. It's still doping, nevertheless.
- doping in the name of clean cycling I see as being especially fraudulent and hypocritical, which reflects more badly on somebody than just cheating. Take Davide Rebellin calling his Olympic silver medal in Beijing "a victory for clean cycling". It doesn't make him any more of a cheat than anybody else who doped, but it makes him harder to have sympathy for when he does get popped.

But for people other than riders, things surely differ. For the authorities, their being corrupt is the absolute dirt worst thing; they can't help if people cheat them, unless they are complicit in it. If people are cheating, the authorities can be incompetent in how they go about tackling that, that's one thing, but being in on it is far worse. And for team doctors, team managers etc., it differs again. The days of full team programs would seem to be passing in favour of smaller pockets and groups. Managers will often go for the "I will ask no questions, you will tell me no lies" approach, but for them a motor is worse because it's harder to spin that as a single rider going rogue, and it implicates the whole team. Who is in on the ruse affects which is worse as well. Doctors obviously have to be corrupt to be assisting in the doping practices in the first place, so for them a motor is not as bad as doping because they have plausible deniability in a motor case (and wouldn't need to be in on it). And at least a motor doesn't endanger a rider's health of course - we know of cases where doctors have been surreptitiously administering doping products as well as what was known about (take the "heated massage pads" of Liberty Seguros), which to me is worse than simply running a doping program.

surely if ur squeeze is Gisele bunchen, this must be one clustfukc of bad cheating

#LauraMulvey #malegaze #misogyny
#TinaFey #Leo'svagina
#drollery
#wilddrollery
#OscarWilde e drollery
hashtagscannibis #weed pleonasmtautology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gni6MdXqYw
Laura Mulvey feminist film theorist n alliterationz
Visual Pleasure in Narrative Cinema http://www.asu.edu/courses/fms504/total-readings/mulvey-visualpleasure.pdf
 
I could win the Tour de france with a motor attached. No matter how much I dope however, I'm not going to be able to compete.

Yes, cheating is cheating, but some forms are far far far worse.

Worst to Least:

Motor, Deals with Authorities, Deals with other riders, Doping
 
Mar 14, 2016
3,092
7
0
Visit site
Re:

PremierAndrew said:
I could win the Tour de france with a motor attached. No matter how much I dope however, I'm not going to be able to compete.

Yes, cheating is cheating, but some forms are far far far worse.

Worst to Least:

Motor, Deals with Authorities, Deals with other riders, Doping
The end result is the same: a rider who shouldn't have won the race, wins it. Whether he uses EPO, a hidden motor or a Nimbus 2000 is irrelevant.