Zajicek given life ban for doping

[joe_papp]

When a rider gets pop’d no matter the level it hurts the sport…I promote a small stage race (pro to am level) and the bigger the “black eye” bike racing receives the harder it is to raise money….it’s trickledown effect.

Now how would you like to run Fly-V and look for sponsors? It’s a tough sell…..I’ve got a arms length and still have to dance around those question.

Mitch, yours is an example of the opposite of what I'm perplexed by...b/c it sounds like in your case, there is at least a subjective relationship b/w evil-doing w/ drugs in cycling and difficulty financing your race. I understand why anyone faced with a real impact (negative) on their life or profession or some major endeavour would be so upset w/ the actions of whoever the latest PZ or JP is...but thanks for sharing regardless. It's helpful to be reminded that there are concrete outcomes stemming from doping at or near the top.

 

[131313]

I can understand how his decision to ride-on would strike you as unconscionable if you had clarity and constancy in your moral vision, and thus viewed doping exclusively through the lens of ethical analysis.

Now the following might be the catalyst for a separate thread, and Mod(s), PLEASE cut and paste this into a new one if you think it necessary (and sustainable), so...

What I still don't have a firm grip on is an explanation for why so many "fans" of pro cycling who have no direct stake in the sport at the elite level and who aren't even adversely impacted in measurable ways in their amateur competitions by what happens "over there" make the decision to deeply personalize the doping problem and willingly identify themselves as its victims. I don't begrudge them their feelings and viewpoints, but I don't understand the headlong rush into the online world to act in ways that, at a glance, seem almost/sometimes pathological.

I think this is a valid question, and it's something I often wonder myself. Obviously not in my case since I have skin in the game, but in the case of the fans. In my case, Phil legitimately now owes me (and all of my teammates) a fair bit of money! But it's not the cash really, rather the stolen races that pi$$#es me off. But I do wonder at times why many of the fans of the sport care so much. So here's my theory(ies):

-most fans of the sport ride a bike, and many have competed at some level, at least US fans.

-the sport is relatively small. You won't find many football fans who know someone who knows someone who played against some famous football player. In cycling, many fans have some sort of connection to even the highest levels of the sport, even if it's through a couple degrees of separation. In many cases, its these connections that may have made them fans of the sport.

-no one can just go out and hit some balls with Federer or play on Center Court at Wimbledon. Chances are, you can go on a ride with some euro or domestic pro, through a hook to some domestic pro on a group ride sprint (this happens more often than I'd like), or go ride up some famous Col, just like your cycling heroes. You aren't sitting in the bleachers a mile away. So again, there's more of a personal connection to the sport.

-at its core, once you get past all of the other requirements of bike handling skills, tactical nous and a strong gut, cycling is ultimately a test of endurance. The drugs and doping methods which are available today are so game-changing and so effective, that it completely has the effect of making the whole thing seem like a circus. Sure, that NFL QB is doped to the gills and golfers now look like linebackers, but there's still a skill component that makes it seem somewhat "real". That goes out the window when some dude is putting out 7 w/kg up a climb. He's gonna win, almost no matter what. That's the perception at least (and I think it's pretty much the reality).

Anyway, those are some of my thoughts...I'll have more later when I have some more time.

 

[ambrose]

just one quick point. in regards to to phill continuing to race. Can you really blame him? assuming that he races bikes because thats what he loves to do,and if he was about to be told he could never do it again, why wouldn't he do as many races as he could before he got banned. another possibility is that he may have wanted to prove to himself that he could do it clean. (this was the case with one of the riders over here who got done).

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

It's helpful to be reminded that there are concrete outcomes stemming from doping at or near the top.

You're a drug dealer. You really need to be reminded of that?

 

[Moose McKnuckles]

I also point out that I don't think the people who I'm wondering about inhabit this forum, and why I don't address them directly.



I'm not expecting a response from them here but rather, soliciting for input as to why a subset of the anti-doping cycling fan public willingly offer themselves up as victims to be "hurt" by a phenomena taking place at the pro level, when they must know by now that pro cycling is rife with doping and it's not an endeavour in which it makes sense to invest much emotional capital.

And yes, I do think that they are not entirely right in the head to willingly position themselves as victims in the first place!

Look, my friend with whom I discuss these issues often talks about the 'drama triangle'. People who are stressed or under pressure or damaged or simply emotionally underdeveloped for some reason in some area of their life will tend to step into one of three roles:

* persecutor
* victim
* rescuer

Sometimes they can flit very quickly between one and another. It's remarkable how consistently people will adopt these roles and how frequently. The likes of the type of anti-doping/cycling fan are victims (they feel personally affronted by the fact of someone else's rule-breaking in an area of their life that they consider to be important); persecutors (they vigorously attack the presumed source of their pain); and, occasionally resccuers (when leaping to each other's defense).

It seems however, that what they don't see is that they are caught up in a psychological drama that has its roots in something entirely unrelated to the issue at hand (which they identify as doping). The key to maturity in this instance would seem to be to step out of the triangle. It's remarkable what an enormous difference it can make to your life when you start recognizing that you are playing a role and just step out of it. Astonishing.

The likes of these folks seem to be so immersed in their role(s) that they can't see how false they are, how disproportionate their behavior is or how unrelated it is to the real source of drama in their lives (which they confuse with doping in pro cycling). They may be bright, witty, balanced people in many respects; but in this they seem to be emotionally stunted. I think it might even be futile to reason with them - in doing so you start to play a role, in this case as a rescuer, and you merely reinforce their sense of being involved in an important drama.

My friend says that stepping out of the triangle is absolutely the best thing to do, and he goes on to say that the fact that they may be effed up is not my responsibility; the fact that they respond in an over-the-top manner to small incidents that are unrelated to their lives is not my responsibility. He would conclude by saying that other people can, and should, take care of themselves.

But it's still interesting to me, since I'm often the target of their seemingly misdirected rage.

Thanks for adding to the discussion, however.

Look, I think it's really cute that someone like you who is best known for dealing drugs teams up with your pals to psychoanalyze everything. I really do. But in the end, you're still nothing but a drug dealer.

It seems you still can't figure out what annoys cycling fans about doping, since, according to you, pro cycling is "rife" with it. What about the people who don't dope? Those who never "made it" because they chose a different color lunch bag. They were cheated by frauds like you. Now you're here on a message board trying to salvage whatever credibility you have. In the end, all you are is a drug pusher. Nothing more.

 

[D-Queued]

...
What I still don't have a firm grip on is an explanation for why so many "fans" of pro cycling who have no direct stake in the sport at the elite level and who aren't even adversely impacted in measurable ways in their amateur competitions by what happens "over there" make the decision to deeply personalize the doping problem and willingly identify themselves as its victims. I don't begrudge them their feelings and viewpoints, but I don't understand the headlong rush into the online world to act in ways that, at a glance, seem almost/sometimes pathological.

...
[/B]

I know that this question was asked with sincerity, but I am surprised.

You think that this is only about what happens 'over there' and is somehow fully contained within a few 'elite level' people?

Anyone who isn't 'over there' or not part of the 'elite level' can go pound sand?

Let's set aside the obvious issue about how a doper at an 'elite level' anyways.

(Joe, you were a doper. NONE of your performances were real let alone at an elite level. Get over it.)

If you cannot see how a 'fan' is going to be personally impacted by the rot at the core, then you are a lot less empathetic than I imagined.

No, I am not trying to put you down. I am frankly surprised.

You were a paid professional, correct?

Why were you paid? What was the return on that investment for those that paid you?

Whose logos were on your kit? What was the return on their investment? Did you represent your sponsors well? Or, is the typical 'elite level' athlete such a narcissist that representing anything other than themselves a foolish thought?

You were paid because someone thought that you might represent a good role model for potential customers. But you weren't. And they aren't. All those people that looked up to you and the 'elites' are having their hopes dashed.

This is a pretty poor investment for your sponsors, don't you think? What message is being sent now? What are they identified with?

Is the reality that the riders are pulling a fast one over on their audience, or are the sponsors in on it too?

Get it?

I guess not. But it is too bad.

Dave.

 

[xnobrakesx]

Yeah same as Kayle LeoGrande, drug suspension becomes "taking time off to concentrate on other things".

 

[porkchop_sideburns]

Look, I think it's really cute that someone like you who is best known for dealing drugs teams up with your pals to psychoanalyze everything. I really do. But in the end, you're still nothing but a drug dealer.

It seems you still can't figure out what annoys cycling fans about doping, since, according to you, pro cycling is "rife" with it. What about the people who don't dope? Those who never "made it" because they chose a different color lunch bag. They were cheated by frauds like you. Now you're here on a message board trying to salvage whatever credibility you have. In the end, all you are is a drug pusher. Nothing more.

This is the best post this forum has ever had!

 

[Fat Jack Fan]

This is the best post this forum has ever had!

Well put Moose McKnuckles.

 

[joe_papp]

Sooo Phil Z. lost his arm in a crash today. That sucks.

 

[pastronef]

Re:

Sooo Phil Z. lost his arm in a crash today. That sucks.

just saw the news. that's bad. best wishes to him