Armstrong charged and banned

[rich p]

Millar has admitted to being a doper. Does that make him an ex-doper? Once a doper?

As to the rest, are they dopers, have they ever been dopers, will they ever dope? Dunno, to soon to say, ask me in 20 years time and we will no doubt know. For now I won't canonise any of them just yet. Have they been a dopers lieutenant, or domestique, or team mate, or shared a hotel room on a grand tour with a doper and looked the other way? You tell me.

Greg, are you still of the opinion that they should all be allowed to dope?
Forgive me if I've misrepresented your postion on here a while ago?

 

[tigger]

This may (or may not) seem surprising, but the process that is being undertaken and the positions / approaches of the various authorities involved (USADA, UCI, WADA, Sparks, the protagonists etc.) also offers up a great deal which might be described as driving intellectual curiosity. It's perfectly possible to thing LA is guilty and still derive satisfaction from analysing and questioning the process which is being undertaken. Getting the right result out of the UCI has quite some value to the future of professional cycling. It's really not all about being a deluded fan. Sorry if that is unacceptable to some of the more vocal on this thread, or if it causes "much detriment".

That's a very fair point Buddfox. I didn't intend to dismiss the curiosity surrounding process etc. It's certainly worth questioning this, but for me it's important to separate the facts of the case (whatever they may be?) from the jurisprudence if you like.

And yes, what the UCI do (and more frighteningly, how they may have been involved) is what I am waiting nervously to hear next.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Greg, are you still of the opinion that they should all be allowed to dope?
Forgive me if I've misrepresented your postion on here a while ago?

short answer; yes

longer answer; nowt to forgive. Yes, if I was 'king of the world' I'd rule that doping is like any other technology in sport (how well would Pistorius run on Douglas Baader style prosthetics?) and is to be allowed, like they already do in tennis. (chortle). But knowing the inherent conservatism of the UCI they'd rule coke, strychnine and speed as the only technologies allowed.

Then we can have 'open' competitions between the professional drugged up loons with life expectancies of slightly less than the shelf life of milk and other competitions for those amateurs who ride clean.

I suspect that within my lifetime genetic manipulation will begin to take over from drug based doping, will be undetectable, will be in widespread use outside of sport and the ruling bodies will cave on it.

 

[tigger]

I suspect that within my lifetime genetic manipulation will begin to take over from drug based doping, will be undetectable, will be in widespread use outside of sport and the ruling bodies will cave on it.

Given what they've inherited from the gene pool, my sons are gonna be unbeatable ;-)

 

[raindog]

......... and other competitions for those amateurs who ride clean.
.

Come on Greg, how would you know they were clean? It would be the same situation we have now with the pros.

this is what Vaughters says about a "level playing field" where everyone dopes

“If you make everything legal, believe me, some people are going to push things way beyond where they are now,” he argues. “Some people will say no to what is essentially suicide, so the winner is the guy who’s willing to risk his health more than anyone else.”

 

[Flying_Monkey]

“If you make everything legal, believe me, some people are going to push things way beyond where they are now,” he argues. “Some people will say no to what is essentially suicide, so the winner is the guy who’s willing to risk his health more than anyone else.”

Seems to me that this is pretty much unarguable.

 

[lukesdad]

Come on Greg, how would you know they were clean? It would be the same situation we have now with the pros.

this is what Vaughters says about a "level playing field" where everyone dopes

“If you make everything legal, believe me, some people are going to push things way beyond where they are now,” he argues. “Some people will say no to what is essentially suicide, so the winner is the guy who’s willing to risk his health more than anyone else.”

As an aside the suicide rate and mental illness cases amongst ex pro's is alarmingly high, and has been for a very long time.

 

[MacB]

As an aside the suicide rate and mental illness cases amongst ex pro's is alarmingly high, and has been for a very long time.

not just in cycling and the long term health of professional athletes isn't exactly rosy either...money and enablers are bad but you'll always have the 'immortality' of the young to contend with as well.

 

[david k]

Seems to me that this is pretty much unarguable.

good signature

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Come on Greg, how would you know they were clean? It would be the same situation we have now with the pros.

this is what Vaughters says about a "level playing field" where everyone dopes

“If you make everything legal, believe me, some people are going to push things way beyond where they are now,” he argues. “Some people will say no to what is essentially suicide, so the winner is the guy who’s willing to risk his health more than anyone else.”

already happens, the doping ban does nothing to prevent those who want to push it from killing themselves. So a very arguable point.

 

[raindog]

already happens, the doping ban does nothing to prevent those who want to push it from killing themselves. So a very arguable point.

True, but to make it legal to kill yourself or damage your health with drugs in sport, isn't the way forward imo.

 

[Noodley]

That's me got my US-version on Tyler's book ordered.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

True, but to make it legal to kill yourself or damage your health with drugs in sport, isn't the way forward imo.

iirc it hasn't been illegal to commit suicide in England & Wales since the early 60's. Thousands of people damage their health every year through drugs, the most popular of which would appear to be alcohol, consumption of which is perfectly legal. So....

What is the moral argument for one standard (of liberty) in the street and another on the 'playing field'?

 

[MacB]

What is the moral argument for one standard (of liberty) in the street and another on the 'playing field'?

My gut instinct has always been in agreement with you and to let them get on with it. But I would have qualms about the peer pressure and pressure to succeed aspect. Open up a free for all and I reckon you'd be scooping up new users that would never have done so otherwise.

Which sits squarely against my belief that all drugs should be legalised, in some ways it feels like clinging to the past. The rose tinted view of the amateur endeavours of sportspeople. The more you look at it the more you realise that money, and advantage, has always been a factor.

 

[Red Light]

My gut instinct has always been in agreement with you and to let them get on with it. But I would have qualms about the peer pressure and pressure to succeed aspect. Open up a free for all and I reckon you'd be scooping up new users that would never have done so otherwise.

And there isn't peer pressure around drinking and smoking?

Which sits squarely against my belief that all drugs should be legalised, in some ways it feels like clinging to the past. The rose tinted view of the amateur endeavours of sportspeople. The more you look at it the more you realise that money, and advantage, has always been a factor.

With you on that one. Legalising and making drugs available on a controlled price basis via Government could remove at a stroke the financial incentive for the criminal cartels to profit out of getting people hooked.