Tour de France

[geoffrey]

Well, we had a Stanley Cup playoffs thread, so we might as well have one on cycling's great event.

Except, I'll provide a twist since I doubt if even two or three people other than me follow pro cycling here.

Two questions:

1) Who's your pick to win this year's Tour? Mountains Jersey? Sprinters Jersey? The climb to the Col de Telegraph?

2 ) This year's tour is remarkable in that no previous tour winner is present. Floyd Landis is still considered the winner of last year's tour so Oscar Pereiro cannot wear the number one he should be wearing (he was runner up last year). When the judgement comes down against Landis (the cycling community largely agrees that the evidence is strongly against him), he then becomes the winner.

My honest opinion of things, I think most of the riders contending for this year's tour are clean. Testing is so accurate, and all of them are tested regularly. It's hard to hide these drugs now... formerly athletes could take masking drugs that hide the effects of EPO, testosterone, ect., but now most of these 'masking' agents are banned substances in themselves.

I'll wager that it's nearly impossible to cheat and not get caught. Hemocrit (how 'thick' your blood is to the layman) is actually regulated, you can't even really blood dope to any great extent because your capped at a certain percentage.

--

Cycling, in Europe, is not only a sport, but a highly competitive business. Getting a corporate logo on a jersey that stands on the podium in Paris at the end of the tour will run you millions a year. Doping essientially cheats the game to get that logo there. Is this fraud?

Sponsors are distancing themselves from teams that have shady practices in terms of doping controls. A market solution, if you will. But the riders (who aren't really that high paid in comparison to say, hockey players or baseball players) who make a living off selling their performance... are they not being fraudulent in getting to the podium illegally... risking their sponsor's image.

What of role models? As an amateur cyclist, I do know people that have used performance enhancing drugs in competition at amateur levels. These drugs are rarely without high risk of complications or long-term effects. I fear that kids coming up through the system are now being led to believe that without doping, you cannot win a race, even a local road race or criterium. We also see this in sports like baseball, where many teenagers playing are taking steriods.

Scary stuff.

So, question two you ask? Should cheating with drugs in sport be a criminal matter?

[Riverwind]

So, question two you ask? Should cheating with drugs in sport be a criminal matter?

Should fraud be a criminal matter? Anyone who wins a race while on drugs and claims the rewards (prize money, sponsorships) is committing a form of fraud and should be subject to the same punishments.

[geoffrey]

Anyone who wins a race while on drugs and claims the rewards (prize money, sponsorships) is committing a form of fraud and should be subject to the same punishments.

Should it be taken further though? The athletes that dope are doing so to get their sponsor's logo on TV, securing them more money. Are the sponsors responsible for fraud as well? Cheating to get their logo on TV?

[Riverwind]

Should it be taken further though? The athletes that dope are doing so to get their sponsor's logo on TV, securing them more money. Are the sponsors responsible for fraud as well? Cheating to get their logo on TV?

Sponsors would never knowingly fund an athlete that takes drugs so they would be victims of fraud - not the perpetrators. As a victim of fraud they would be entilted to sue to recover monies that were paid out under false pretenses.

[Mad_Michael]

I'll wager that it's nearly impossible to cheat and not get caught.

I'd wager you are wrong.

Who is caught for doping is more a function of what country they come from and in which country the competition takes place in, rather than who is doping or not. Olympic history is filled with many examples of this phenomena, the Ben Johnson & Carl Lewis case is probably the most clear-cut and blatant example.

[jester]

Why not have an "enhanced" Olympics where you can take what you want.

[geoffrey]

I'll wager that it's nearly impossible to cheat and not get caught.

I'd wager you are wrong.

Who is caught for doping is more a function of what country they come from and in which country the competition takes place in, rather than who is doping or not. Olympic history is filled with many examples of this phenomena, the Ben Johnson & Carl Lewis case is probably the most clear-cut and blatant example.

I really disagree. That was then. It's not the same anymore. WADA is pretty unbiased in controls and essientially everyone that performs well gets tested. The tests are alot more accurate now than ever before.

You have to leave your whereabouts with testing agencies at all times, no vacation goes unwatched. They can test you at 2am. At work. In training, after a race. It's unbelievable.

I don't think that many people can dope and get away with it anymore really. The reason cycling was so bad at the end of the 90's is because EPO didn't have a reliable test and it was extremely effective in the sport. Now taking EPO will certainly get you caught. People have resorted to storing excess blood and pumping it back in pre-competition... though that's regulated through hemocrit maximums.

So I don't know, I think it's very unlikely that a huge amount of people are doping in cycling... in other sports I can't be too sure... but track and field would be along the same lines.

Why not have an "enhanced" Olympics where you can take what you want.

I've heard this argument before and it's flawed. First, it's dangerous, there are serious side effects and risks with all types of performance enhancing drugs. It would become a competition between who could push themselves so close to the edge without killing themselves. Seeing a few handfuls of deaths every Olympics isn't a great idea.

Second, it sends a terrible message to kids. Pop a few pills, take the right recovery drink and you'll be fit. We'd have alot more drug use amongst juniors, something I really fear.

Third, it devalues the whole aspect of human acheivement. Clean sport would show what humans can acheive with commitment and training. Doped sport shows what doctors can do to make you super human.

Edited July 14, 2007 by geoffrey

[geoffrey]

So, the doping controls work but apparently they haven't been a deterent:

PARIS — Cycling and its premier event, the Tour de France, were reeling Tuesday from yet another blow that threatened what was left of the event's credibility: a failed doping test by one of its biggest stars.

Alexandre Vinokourov tested positive for a banned blood transfusion after winning last weekend's time trial, prompting his Astana team to pull out and sending police on a raid of the team hotel.

Source: http://www.globesports.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070724.wspttour24/GSStory/GlobeSportsOther/home

Vino was a favourite to win before crashing in stage 5 and injuring his knees. He came back to win a spectacular solo victory on the mountainous stage 15, just like Floyd Landis did before his positive test for testosterone.

The sad part of this, coming back to the moral issue... the reason why the Kazak Cycling Federation financially and professionally supported this team was social. Some estimates have 250,000 Kazak teens addicted to drugs, and the government heavily sponsored this team to create some positive role models in Vino and one of his support riders Kashechkin.

This essientially destroyed that entire mission. The government says they still support the team, though I'm sure the plan to give these kids something to look up to is destroyed.

--

To be fair, the B-sample is still awaiting testing. Vinokourov insists that his serious fall (it required several hours of hospitalisation) led to the abnormalities in his blood. Doping experts have denied this possibility. Hopefully this won't be dragged out like Landis's case.

[White Doors]

Didn't the guy with the yellow jacket pull out too? MOnsu....(sp?)

Can't remember.

A bad year for the tour I'd say.

[guyser]

Didn't the guy with the yellow jacket pull out too? MOnsu....(sp?)

Can't remember.

A bad year for the tour I'd say.

Rasmussen, he was the Yellow Jersey leader but got pulled from the Tour by his team for lying. He has been sent home.

This whole race is a disaster, ratings over here are horrible.

[Higgly]

This whole race is a disaster, ratings over here are horrible.

Yeah, no kidding. At least everyone is recognizing it - not like that charade that is going on over in Major League Baseball with Barry Bonds.

[sharkman]

Barry Bonds is a complete joke, and not the kind of publicity baseball needs.

[geoffrey]

Barry Bonds is a complete joke, and not the kind of publicity baseball needs.

Interesting. Cycling (possible as big as baseball in Europe) has such a bad name for dopping, generally because they are the only sport that really enforces/catches people.

Then you have baseball and hockey where nearly every player is sucking back 'roids yet enjoy an untarnished image because the leagues have decided to not enforce it and give itself a bad name.

The difference? The people I ride with competitively generally don't use drugs for their advantage (I know one that had, mind you). The people I went to school with in baseball and hockey, a good percentage used 'roids regularly to be tough enough for the next level. One is playing pro hockey right now, another two are playing AAA baseball.

Hmm.

Barry though, obviously a cheater, get's a free ride while the top level of cycling destroys careers of anyone caught as much as possibly cheating... a guilty until proven innocent type of system.

[guyser]

Interesting. Cycling (possible as big as baseball in Europe) has such a bad name for dopping, generally because they are the only sport that really enforces/catches people.

Bigger than baseball.

What about Olympics anything, they test for evrything including that wondrous performance enhancing drug Marijuana.

Baseball did not, nor did hockey , test for steriods. So in fact Barry is within the rules of the game, perhaps not the spirit , but baseball always welcomed cheating in the past.

Then you have baseball and hockey where nearly every player is sucking back 'roids yet enjoy an untarnished image because the leagues have decided to not enforce it and give itself a bad name.

Baseball perhaps, but I really dont think hockey is ripe with roid use. Call me naive, but of those that I knew who played, none of them were on it.

Barry though, obviously a cheater, get's a free ride while the top level of cycling destroys careers of anyone caught as much as possibly cheating... a guilty until proven innocent type of system.

Cycling did it to themselves. They wanted a clean sport and made roids against the rules. Baseball has not wanted that, ergo signing Selig as Commish....a very lame one at that, which is why he got the job.

And thats just it, Bonds is not a cheater. I dont like him at all . But he is not guilty within the rules of basesball, he would be out of the game if so.

What I find surprising , and read on the weekend (wish i could cite ) was that a large percentage of the whiners about Barry are pitchers, and word is that in secret testing years ago PRIOR to instituting new rules about drugs, is that alm,ost 80% of the pitchers were on juice.

Kind of evens the score, and yet Bonds gets the press.

[geoffrey]

That's fair, but my argument has always been against baseball, not Bonds. Bonds is an unethical person. Baseball is a horrible example for kids.