issoisso wrote:
I'm pretty certain the evolution is the other way around.
It used to be "oh....positive. ok. he gets 10 minutes added to his overall time. carry on with the race"
Now it's "F**K HIM BAN HIM" etc.
The only problem I still see is that most people are STILL amazingly naive.
The same things happen over and over and over and over again in a cycle and almost all fans fail to learn from it.
It's like having a house infested with rats and killing one. EVERY TIME the vast majority of fans will say "that was definitely the last rat" and will be shocked when the OBVIOUS happens (another rat is caught) yet again. It's always like that.
There have been oh so many doping scandals in the history of the sport and there probably hasn't been even a single one where the majority of fans haven't gone the same route (call it the innocent route or the idiot route, whatever you like) and declared that "now, surely it's a clean sport".
Failing to realise
A. A lot of very powerful drugs are undetectable or extremely hard to detect
B. (and this is the most important part) THAT A CERTAIN RIDER IS A GOOD GUY MEANS ZERO, NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING AS TO WHETHER OR NOT HE IS A CHEAT. And people know that, and think that, but refuse to admit it's the case with their particular favorite rider. Every time it's "not this guy...", only to be shell shocked when the guy's caught, even if it's a guy who openly admitted to using dope as a junior (no, not just Riccò, many more).
This seems like a rambling, aimless wandering rant, but there is a point here.
It's that, in all these things, over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again the SAME EXACT things happen and most fans NEVER EVER learn from it. It's enough to convince one that the ridiculous saying that the masses are stupid, isn't so ridiculous.
As an aside, Deadpool mentioned the lifetime ban. I feel there are 2 main points to it:
- The UCI wants it, I don't see why anyone passionate about cycling wouldn't want it, but the WADA doesn't allow it yet. As of January 1st 2009, the UCI finally got them to extend the maximum limit from 2 to 4 year bans, so any new doping cases (believe me, they're coming. Anne Gripper has said so herself that the blood passport will result in a few in about February or so) will result in 4 year bans, not 2 years.
As for the original point of the post, it's not so much revelling in their downfall.
There are 2 different reactions:
- The disappointment and anger in realising the rider is doped;
- The feeling of justice when the rider is caught;
The reason you only see the second is simple: the people who you see having that second reaction have had the first one a loooooong time ago.
You've known for years that a certain guy robbed a bank. After many years, he's finally busted. Is part of your reaction going to be "oh no he robbed a bank! I'm so disappointed...."? Of course not, you've known that for a long time
Here's to the new tests for HGH and autologous blood transfusions that are coming this year. May they be fool-proof, or close to it (I know, it's a pipe dream of mine), so that the difference between doping and not doping can be reduced to negligible.
Over and out.
There better of been a ds with the last name bettini...
Macquet wrote:
"We all know that wasn't the real footage of the Worlds anyway. That was just the staged footage to perpetuate the coverup that it was actually Vinokourov that won the race."
rjc_43 wrote:
I looked through several pages of threads to see where would be best to put this post, and this looked like the best place to high-jack a thread. I didn't want to make a new one.
I'm currently doing some Uni coursework that requires a fair bit of journal checking out, in other words looking through 100+ journals for the one study that supports what you want to say just so you can say it with proof. (Surprisingly there aren't many studies that say if you just ride your bike you get fit...)
I happened to come across an interesting study to do with doping...
This is the abstract for the study (in other words the blurb on the back of a book).
If you want to read more about studies about doping (or, it's more like the history of doping(anti-doping), I reccomend Sandro Donati's "Anti-doping: The fraud behind the stage", though it's gettining a little "old" now, it's still very intersting. A google search should give you the article.
I don't. I just happened upon that article whilst searching actual scientific studies, not any kind of "fraud behind the stage" that sounds more like its based on opinions than actual science. But thanks anyway.
Bodybuilders muscle out as dope-test agents arrive
4:00AM Thursday May 21, 2009
The Belgian bodybuilding championships were cancelled after all competitors fled when doping officials showed up.
After a spate of positive doping tests over the past years in Belgium, the championships had been moved just across the Dutch border to Vlissingen.
"They must have felt safe out there," doping official Hans Cooman said.
Still, Cooman and two colleagues got the necessary papers to check the tournament in the Netherlands.
And when they identified themselves just before the event, as the 20 bodybuilders were weighing in and preparing themselves, the testers got the surprise of their lives.
The competitors all just got up and left, preferring to quit the event rather than submit to doping tests. Some grabbed their gear and headed straight out the door. "They must have been flabbergasted," Cooman said.
Bodybuilders usually take months to prepare for such championships.
"I have never seen anything like it and hope never to see anything like it again," Cooman said.
The sport has a history of doping, "and this incident didn't do its reputation any good", he said.
Last year, 22 of 29 tests were positive, either for steroids or for refusing testing.
"This was the first time, though, we turned up in the Netherlands."
Minutes before the start, it left organisers with no option but to tell a few hundred fans - having not seen a single gleaming pose - that there was no point in staying.
Now, Cooman and his colleagues will report the case to the disciplinary committee, which will have to decide whether the athletes can be sanctioned because they refused to be tested.
When contacted, a man at the NABBA Belgium bodybuilding federation refused to discuss the facts and could not explain why the athletes had suddenly rushed off. He refused to give his name.
- AP
The article is from the New Zealand Herald, and as McCauley says, "who says cycling has a doping problem?"
CrueTrue wrote:
I had no idea where to put this, so it ended up here. A perfect example of a picture that says more than a 1.000 words.
only if 0>1000
I have no idea whatsoever what that photo is supposed to "say".
The preceding post is ISSO 9001 certified
"I love him, I think he's great. He's transformed the sport in so many ways. Every person in cycling has benefitted from Lance Armstrong, perhaps not financially but in some sense" - Bradley Wiggins on Lance Armstrong
. It's still a good read though (and suits this topic) 
