ITV4's review of doping issues, broadcast on the TdF rest day

[400bhp]

Never mind the doping piece, I like Boardman's piece in each show about the effects of drag. Essentially little intellectual digs at the non-sky teams indifference to the science around wind resistance.

 

[lukesdad]

Is that it????
Blimey, I'd be better off having a debate with the headcam man that training at altitude is the same as blood doping and I'm steering well clear of that cul-de-sac!!!!
p.s. yes, of course I've been drinking.

Did you not see the interview ?

 

[smutchin]

No they didn't but they're reaping the benefits of a decade of investment.

Tbh, I'd rather my taxes went into funding a successful international pro cycling team than propping up thieving bastard banks.

 

[rich p]

No they didn't but they're reaping the benefits of a decade of investment.

I suspect that we're never going to agree on this one. I see new investment in cycling and sensible training methods as a good thing instead of the previous laissez-faire approach where Bertie was encouraged to spend his wages and dope on steak...
Trolling - please ignore me!

 

[400bhp]

Kimmage really got stuck into Astana's manager. Mentioned his name quite a few times.

Surely a matter of time before the wheels fall off that team isn't it?

 

[lukesdad]

I suspect that we're never going to agree on this one. I see new investment in cycling and sensible training methods as a good thing instead of the previous laissez-faire approach where Bertie was encouraged to spend his wages and dope on steak...
Trolling - please ignore me!

I agree wholeheartdly, my point is are the other teams going to catch up or are they going to take another route ?
To go back to the dowsett interview he was talking about the Pinarello s both teams used, and various components for the TT and said they had to use the sponsors bars ( which i gather he thought were pretty crap) then inferred that sky had no such worries and dropped in the 12k

 

[smutchin]

You ve got me now I thought you were talking about BMC and Katusha ?

....and budgets ,no ?

Well, I made a post about Garmin's modern methods, shortly after which you made a post about modern methods costing money, so I assumed you were responding to my comments. Maybe I've got my wires crossed.

Anyway, I picked on Garmin rather than Sky precisely to avoid getting sidetracked by a discussion of funding and resources, because that isn't really the point. The mention of BMC and Katusha was an admittedly somewhat oblique way of highlighting the fact that Garmin are far from being the richest team in the peloton.

Other teams - again, I'm thinking specifically of AG2R - could follow the Garmin example if they wanted to.

 

[lukesdad]

Tbh, I'd rather my taxes went into funding a successful international pro cycling team than propping up thieving b****** banks.

Or for that matter a Bank propping up a team of thieving b****** dopers ?

 

[lukesdad]

Well, I made a post about Garmin's modern methods, shortly after which you made a post about modern methods costing money, so I assumed you were responding to my comments. Maybe I've got my wires crossed.

Anyway, I picked on Garmin rather than Sky precisely to avoid getting sidetracked by a discussion of funding and resources, because that isn't really the point. The mention of BMC and Katusha was an admittedly somewhat oblique way of highlighting the fact that Garmin are far from being the richest team in the peloton.

Other teams - again, I'm thinking specifically of AG2R - could follow the Garmin example if they wanted to.

Ah but this is the crux isn't it which way are they going to go, they could all say feck it we going the europcar way and not compete, or go back to their old ways and try and compete, or try to go the sky or garmin way. Anyway I fear the next decade of GTs maybe somewhat predictable

 

[Cycling Dan]

Yes it is wrong to use illegal substances. And should be hammered - 5 years first time, life for a second at a minimum. Career ending suspension for a first offence for most riders. Plus the teams and their management to be heavily penalised, to focus the minds of those supposedly in charge of their riders. Loss of World Tour licence for 2 years would make some of the less "interested" management think.
Investment in proper structured training and, for instance, altitude work which does not have to cost a fortune, but requires a large amount of dedication and application. To suggest it is too expensive for €12 million euro budget teams is nonsense. Hotels at altitude can be cheap if you book the place out of season, which is when a lot of the work gets done. What is needed by some teams is a shift in mindset, where the team takes responsibility for rider training, welfare, nutrition, individual programmes and monitoring them (all easy with technology, and does not just say "be at the start of xyz race ready to go in x months". That was the old way, and look where it got "traditional" teams.
Sky and Garmin are examples of changing the paradigm.

What I said applies less to TDF teams but more cycling as a whole. Look at semi pro or pro but not TDF standard. You will see the divisions much more clearly.

 

[smutchin]

However with the money they have they can invest in a better trainer and programs etc. Even send him to the hills of f*** knows where to practice where another team may not be able too.

Tenerife schmenerife! Andy Rihs is currently building a state of the art new cycling base on the moon - ultimate altitude training!

They should ban this kind of nonsense.

 

[Cycling Dan]

Tenerife schmenerife! Andy Rihs is currently building a state of the art new cycling base on the moon - ultimate altitude training!

They should ban this kind of nonsense.

You missed my point entirely.

 

[suzeworld]

Such a shame that ITV did not get either Liggett or Sherwen to contribute their views...that would have been fun

Good point, are they totally complicit in all the doping of the past?

 

[suzeworld]

Either one ,it relays back to what I originally said. Is it wrong for a team to dope to become competitive again vs a rival which outranks it in both areas. Fact is most teams will dope but legal or illegal doping being the question.

It maybe part of the question, but the line is drawn and one side is legal, the other isn't, so all players should stay on the right side.

The other part of the question is the riders' health. Pushing their body with training and diet takes enough of a toll; who knows what impact the illegal options have on their bodies AND the pressure to use is well enough described in various riders' biographies, it is not really a free choice if you are told you can't ever win unless you join the doping train.

BUT if the prevailing culture is not to do it, then it is easier for everyone to not do it which is healthier for the individual, if nothing else.

 

[Cycling Dan]

It maybe part of the question, but the line is drawn and one side is legal, the other isn't, so all players should stay on the right side.

The other part of the question is the riders' health. Pushing their body with training and diet takes enough of a toll; who knows what impact the illegal options have on their bodies AND the pressure to use is well enough described in various riders' biographies, it is not really a free choice if you are told you can't ever win unless you join the doping train.

BUT if the prevailing culture is not to do it, then it is easier for everyone to not do it which is healthier for the individual, if nothing else.

One counter to that is it could and should be the riders once choice. They should be informed of any and all side effects and what it does. Of course that's a counter to the free will argument. The rider may not know all the information.
Lastly being harmful is in no means a requirement to make a drug illegal. Sure it has side effects but everything does. A lot of the time it's illegal as the drug is seen to give a unfair advantage. Safe or not is very much the campaign line for Americans on weed. Weed on te whole is much safer than alcohol but its still illegal. Of course that depends on whom you ask. Pro or anti weed. Ok off track now.