[phoehn9111]

“The fact that I was able to finish ahead in the mountains and in the general classification means that the sport has changed in 10 years,” Froome told Reuters.

“Sport is going in the right direction. My results are proof of that.”

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why someone who can
almost win the TT, the mountains, and any other stage at will
would be proof of a clean peloton. I would think the opposite
might be indicated. Froome is playing with dynamite making any
comments and would be better off remaining silent and trying
to fly under the radar, particularly in light of SKYs dominance in general.

 

[Purt]

Him winning means he is the only one doping?

 

[Local Hero]

It makes sense if he's clean.

 

[burgrat]

“The fact that I was able to finish ahead in the mountains and in the general classification means that the sport has changed in 10 years,” Froome told Reuters.

“Sport is going in the right direction. My results are proof of that.”

Perhaps someone can enlighten me as to why someone who can
almost win the TT, the mountains, and any other stage at will
would be proof of a clean peloton. I would think the opposite
might be indicated. Froome is playing with dynamite making any
comments and would be better off remaining silent and trying
to fly under the radar, particularly in light of SKYs dominance in general.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Wtf does he mean my results are proof of that?
It means nothing.
I love when these guys make statements like this and "cycling is changing". Never mind the positives at the Giro, etc. That was a long time ago...last month.
There is currently no certain way to prove that anyone is clean so they should just say that or nothing at all.

 

[jlgoodin78]

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Wtf does he mean my results are proof of that?
It means nothing.
I love when these guys make statements like this and "cycling is changing". Never mind the positives at the Giro, etc. That was a long time ago...last month.
There is currently no certain way to prove that anyone is clean so they should just say that or nothing at all.

It sounds as you believe them all to be juiced. What criteria do you use to believe someone to be clean? Are all race winners dirty & can anyone win clean according to your standards? I ask not to be challenging but to understand a fan mentality that sounds different than mine. I believe the sport is cleaner but still is experiencing a culture shift to get rid of those with the old mentality. Better technology in equipment, gear, & advancements in physio training methods (actual non-dope training plans) have actually resulted in flat--or slower--race speeds, just one item I believe indicates a sport that's cleaning up, not to mention the mindset of some of the newer, younger riders.

 

[cda 455]

It sounds as you believe them all to be juiced. What criteria do you use to believe someone to be clean? Are all race winners dirty & can anyone win clean according to your standards? I ask not to be challenging but to understand a fan mentality that sounds different than mine. I believe the sport is cleaner but still is experiencing a culture shift to get rid of those with the old mentality. Better technology in equipment, gear, & advancements in physio training methods (actual non-dope training plans) have actually resulted in flat--or slower--race speeds, just one item I believe indicates a sport that's cleaning up, not to mention the mindset of some of the newer, younger riders.

History.


Since 1991 winners have been dopers probably as often as winners have been clean. I believe dopers have won much more often than clean riders.

Take, for example, the seven TDF wins that were stripped from Pharmstrong. If the Tour organizers wanted to give those wins to a rider that has never been a convicted doper, they would have to go anywhere from the fifth place finisher all the way up to the tenth place finisher!


In my unfounded opinion, it appears big name riders are being more cautious/less doping or no doping than no-name riders or up and coming riders. Before he got busted and suspended Contador was a superman just like Froome is riding now. Since he has returned he doesn't race like a superman anymore. I put Froome in the up and coming category.

Do I think Froome is doping? Given the history of the sport, my unfounded opinion is yes; I think Froome is doping. The fame and glory of winning while secretly doping outweighs the risk of getting caught for a rider in Froome's shoes. Contador has won and not been caught so he's 'been-there-done-that' in regards to feeling the fame and glory so that's why I believe he's probably riding cleaner or clean judging by his pre and post doping bust results.

 

[Wookiebiker]

It sounds as you believe them all to be juiced. What criteria do you use to believe someone to be clean? Are all race winners dirty & can anyone win clean according to your standards?

Given the history of the sport ... the fact that athletes can beat the tests on a regular basis ... the fact that riders are still using and getting caught taking EPO and other PED's, and getting beat by other riders (such as Froom) ... there is little you can do but accept at this time ... the peloton is still using PED's.

The real difference is that they are better at hiding their use and are likely not using them in such large quantities as in the past. They have had to change their methods a little to stay under the radar, but the number of riders using PED's has not decreased from the past ... basically, the sport is far from clean and far from getting cleaner.

As things move along the drugs will get better, they will become even less detectable and eventually will be able to change riders at the genetic level, which will be completely undetectable under any test or evaluation. The only way to catch that would be to have a DNA sample from long ago, before they became a top level rider ... then compare it to their current DNA and see if any changes took place ... and that would be massively expensive and likely won't ever happen.

 

[Dave Cutter]

Cheating.... to include the use of performance enchanting drugs... has always been a part of sports. Cycling sports aren't any different than any other sport in regards to the nature of humans. People cheat, people use drugs, people cheat using drugs. It won't ever change.

 

[burgrat]

It sounds as you believe them all to be juiced. What criteria do you use to believe someone to be clean? Are all race winners dirty & can anyone win clean according to your standards? I ask not to be challenging but to understand a fan mentality that sounds different than mine. I believe the sport is cleaner but still is experiencing a culture shift to get rid of those with the old mentality. Better technology in equipment, gear, & advancements in physio training methods (actual non-dope training plans) have actually resulted in flat--or slower--race speeds, just one item I believe indicates a sport that's cleaning up, not to mention the mindset of some of the newer, younger riders.

I can't 100% say that someone (like Froome, for ex.) is doping unless they get caught. I still enjoy pro cycling and I will continue to watch knowing that doping happens and that it has for a long time. My beef is when these guys make statements saying this and that occurred in the past and that it's not happening anymore, when clearly it continues. They get NO benefit of the doubt in my mind based on everything that has happened over the last decade (Lance et al) and beyond.
What I find really telling is when a guy wins a race and then is later popped. Where is the outrage? For example when Andy Schleck inherits the Tour win after Contador tests positive, wouldn't a clean athlete (and peloton for that matter) by absolutely psycho pissed about it. You didn't get a ceremony, no standing on the top of the podium, less publicity, etc. etc. Instead there's a wimper or two, but no real outrage from the other competitors that they have been robbed of something. That tells me a lot of them are a part of it and they feel that it goes with the job.
Another example is from the recent Giro. Santambrogio won stage 14 then later got popped for EPO. Did he take a clean rider's win away on that stage?
I just know that if in my work, a coworker knowingly cheated and beat me out of a promotion or a bonus, for example, I would not be quiet about it.

So yes, I do think doping continues in pro cycling, it has for a very long time, and it will continue to do so. I watch it with a jaundiced eye. I just don't want to hear another rider explain how clean they are because there is no way to prove it and we've all been burned before.

 

[Wookiebiker]

What I find really telling is when a guy wins a race and then is later popped. Where is the outrage? For example when Andy Schleck inherits the Tour win after Contador tests positive, wouldn't a clean athlete (and peloton for that matter) by absolutely psycho pissed about it.

Well ... Schleck would have ran into a problem considering his brother was busted for doping ... and chances are, he was on the same "Program" as Frank.

I will say though ... it would have been funny to see him go bat sh!t crazy about Contador getting caught ... then do the same thing when his brother had been caught. That would have been worth seeing

 

[Ventruck]

lol what's this guy on? Chris Shroome.

 

[spookyload]

How about a power sprinter riding away from mountain climbers like TJ, Dan Martin, and Giovanni Visconti on a cat 1 climb? Nobody wants to talk about that it seems. I guess that is a Christmas miracle.

 

[roddjbrown]

*facepalm* why don't they just stop talking?!

 

[den bakker]

*facepalm* why don't they just stop talking?!

then people would have a wank over them dodging the topic.

 

[cda 455]

Froome "Cycling is moving in the right direction"

Yet news like this makes it hard to believe:

Pierre Rolland abandoned the Dauphiné after 20 kilometres of racing on the last stage, citing tendon problems that had affected him on Saturday evening after he took part in a breakaway for most of stage 7.

But according to Dr Mégret who independently conducts health tests for the French cycling federation (FFC), the National League of Pro Cycling (LNC Pro) and the Movement for a Credible Cycling (MPCC), the Europcar rider shouldn’t not have taken to the start on Sunday due to abnormally low cortisol levels.

Once the news was broken by lequipe.fr on Monday morning, team manager Jean-René Bernaudeau denied that his team had contravened the rules of the League and the Movement he adheres to.

“Pierre was controlled at 6.45am”, Bernaudeau explained. “Normally, half an hour is necessary to get a reliable result. It was impossible to get it on time because of the very early start time of the stage. We contacted Dr Mégret who authorized the start.”

Bernaudeau’s version is now contradicted by the doctor. “The test was done on Saturday morning”, Mégret told Reuters.

Rolland Stopped By French Health Test | Cyclingnews.com

 

[jspharmd]

I don't think the use of PEDs and enjoyment of pro cycling are mutually exclusive. Conversely, I'm not an advocate for the use of PEDs, it just doesn't bother me that they do this. Being an athlete all my life I've seen people use/abuse PEDs in many different sports (on the amateur level), so I know that it is highly unlikely to move to the professional level of nearly any sport without PEDs. Cycling just likes to air the dirty laundry.

 

[spade2you]

Cycling just likes to air the dirty laundry.

Pretty much. We also demonize a few managers and riders to pretend it's not happening elsewhere. :idea:

 

[Local Hero]

Do low cortisol levels indicate cortisone doping?

Do cortisol levels change throughout the day?

 

[spade2you]

Do low cortisol levels indicate cortisone doping?

Possibly if the body has adapted to using corticosteroids and stopped making them. Sure, there is the possibility that he has some sort of adrenal deficiency, but.........

 

[jlgoodin78]

I absolutely agree that the reality is that there will always be cheats in the sport, in any sport for that matter. The difference in 1% performance at that level to be competitive or shelled demands a specific regimen and discipline in every area, which obviously included--and still includes--doping for many riders.

However, this doesn't mean that every rider is doping, even those who are competitive. That mindset and perpetual skepticism takes away from those who are advocating for and living real change, which I believe is a growing number within the peloton, even if not the majority. It's absolutely unrealistic to believe any sport to be pure, but to point fingers and accuse everyone who participates at that level--and especially those who win at it--to be dirty really diminishes the work of those who are approaching it clean. Really, seeing how human and erratic some of Cadel's performances have been over the years and how chippy and unexplosive his wins have been, I can't imagine his 2011 TdF win was a dirty performance.

It's a standard I wouldn't want applied in my life and I can't bring myself to use a different standard with these guys. Thus I choose to give the benefit of the doubt unless there's a real compelling case or strong evidence otherwise. It's only fair to me to apply the same standard I'd like applied to me. I don't think that's naivety in any way, but is a fair approach.

In my opinion, this approach, in concert with tighter doping controls, more stringent penalties, and avenues for cycling to expose the past without facing significant recourse that would discourage coming forward & cleaning up (i.e. a truth in reconciliation process) would go much farther to purge the sport than vocal skepticism of every strong performance.