What I don't get - there are so many young (and not so young) professional athletes with potential out there who would love a sponsorship - why would ANY sponsor give a single dollar to a convicted doper? Is this some "any news is good news" kind of thing? If I would sponsor an Athlete I wouldn't go near anyone associated with a positive WADA test, not even rumors, and for sure not a convict.

The same reason futbol or NFL still employs batterers, cheaters, morally and ethically corrupt players; the vast majority of people forget all about this when their teams are winning and said players are performing.

She is racing Cairns next weekend mate. Oh so you are saying you can dope and hope to never get caught and if you do all is fixed by apologizing or saying it was 'taken unintentionally' ? Some people are more liked than others and that is a basic component of the ganging up or choosing to embrace. Meanwhile she said she would never race again, but look out for the all the social media posts from the pros supporting beth mckenzie come june 10 in Ironman Cairns.

Just look at Lisa Hutthaler's facebook page, lots of sycophantic hero worshiping. Maybe she's busy deleting abusive posts after training sessions as her past behaviour was utterly shameless, but I suspect not....

SteveMc

I'm sure that when she returned to racing she had to do a lot of that. Yesterday, the first 5 or 6 comments on HED's Instagram photo of Michie were all about doping and those comments were all deleted.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Well look at all the sponsors for team Sky....they appear to be getting their money's worth. I think the reality is that hard core people like us know what is going on. General population, they just want to see gear under fast people and will go and buy it.

How do you know that there was `purpose and intent` as according to Gerdes/mckenzie it was accidental. Is there ever a place in your mind that it could be accidental. Or it is black and white.

I think it must be the case, its the only explanation. But I still think there is a difference - Team Sky is "only" under investigation, and known to be immoral in abusing medicine to enhance their riders under the cover of medical exemptions. So as long as nobody is convicted, sponsors can just look at their numbers and exposures and ignore the rest. But if you are a sponsor and you have 5 CVs of guys you could give money to on your desk, only one of them is a convicted doper, how can you be so .... to ignore that just because he is 10% more likely to win a race? (insert any word here, for example greedy, careless, heartless, without principles, uncaring about the sports you are sponsoring, etc etc)

“It is bad business for sport to nail their best athletes and I think all high levels sports are okay with having a flawed system.”

Bingo! I have not been in the sport that long but have heard from credible people that WTC in the past may have swept admission of doping and or absentee from the sport (after said admissions) under the rug for this reason...

Anyone who thinks Michael Jordan’s 18 month TO THE DAY retirement wasn’t a league suspension is crazy.

I thought the same myself a number of years ago. Fast forward to today and I've had the privilege of working with, meeting, bike fitting, and coaching a couple.few dozen pros. First and probably least important, they are all super nice and I would be fairly surprised if any of them were taking any form of PEDs. Take it with a grain of salt. More importantly I've watched the progress of a lot of these athletes over a number of years, and seen a lot of bike power files and run files from training and racing. I've seen nothing to suggest anything other than a slow progression in fitness through massive amounts of hard work. PEDs and in particularly oxygen vectoring type drugs would be pretty obvious both in race results and training data.

I'm not saying triathlon is clean. I am saying it is probably not nearly as dirty as cycling, (mostly because there is far less money on the table). They also need to test more. Adam Otstot's (3rd at CHOO last week) summed it up nicely a few days ago, "Over the past 3 years I have been on the podium in three 70.3s and top 10 in 4 other races. Times tested in the span: once"

Sbernardi wrote:

Anyone who thinks Michael Jordan’s 18 month TO THE DAY retirement wasn’t a league suspension is crazy.

It may have been a secret suspension but don't think it was for PED
https://bleacherreport.com/articles/131997-mjs-1st-retirement-was-it-a-secret-suspension

---

AJ

-------------------------------------------------------
IM WC Hawaii 2024

My opinion is that we should be harsh with convicted dopers. I get it that they can change and race clean later. But that is not the point.

When young athletes see that you get a second chance than likelyhood of making wrong decisions increase.

But when young athletes see that you will throw away your career with a positive than maybe they think twice. Everyone should be made clear that when he makes the wrong decision he will put everything at risk. Maybe he could get away with it but if not, than it's over. And while it's unfortunately not possible to ban someone for life we can at least make sure that their performance won't be given credit animore.

As a person everyone deserves a second chance. As an athlete not so much.

---

10k - 30:48 / half - 1:06:40

i agree. it's cynical, and i wish it weren't so, but i think that probably a lot of triathletes are either naive or sanctimonious about the state of doping in our sport. you read some of the articles that are written about it and it's not to be convinced that lots of people are on something. considering how many age-group triathletes dope (as has been established in peer-reviewed research), the idea that there's "not enough money" in the sport doesn't hold. the base salary for pro tour cycling is crap, too, (25k for continental tour and 30k for world tour riders) but we all believe those guys are jazzed to the gills.

it's an insanely demanding sport, both in terms of performance and recovery. the benefits for doping are clearly massive, at all distances. most triathletes race infrequently, and get tested very rarely. occam's razor says, to me, that there's doping going on.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

or i'm not going to burn someone at the stake for past mistakes.

he doped in the past. thousands have done it.. i'm not saying it's right. but he served his ban and is allowed to race again.

i've been following him on strava since 2013... that's FIVE years, and i've watched his training progress. mainly out of curiosity (i follow a few pros). like i said, i'm no expert, but all that progression seems pretty natural. his running has really improved over the past 2 years, a lot of that has to do with being leaner.

i'm not saying he's NOT doping. i'm just saying that just because someone improves on their run, doesn't mean they are cheating, even if they did so in the past.

Careful, that kind of talk isn't allowed here. They're going to accuse you of doping next. I happen to agree with you though.

I'm surprised folks here don't complain about Laurent Jalabert taking age group podiums at WTC events......

Supposedly for being a degenerate gambler.
Not PEDs.

---

float , hammer , and jog

presumably the NBA looked at pete rose and said, "no thanks."

anyway, there are theories that some athletes who have temporarily ducked out of competition in their primes were 'encouraged' to do so after testing positive. that a league/promoter/race director said, basically, "why don't you sit out this year?"

from the economic point of view it makes sense. the athlete and the league lose with a positive test, but '6 months for a hamstring' doesn't really raise any eyebrows.

---

____________________________________
https://lshtm.academia.edu/MikeCallaghan

http://howtobeswiss.blogspot.ch/

This is certainly an interesting topic. Here are some interesting facts to consider:
- Testing for PED’s in sport is highly ineffective. Lance Armstrong was tested hundreds of times and NEVER had a reported failure. In all probability Floyd Landis failed test was due to massive dehydration, which is not to say he was not doping, it is saying his test failure was more fluke than good testing. Victor Conte has spoken to the details on how he, and hundreds (thousands?) of “doctors” can administer drugs and avoid being caught on tests by following established protocols.
- 99% of cycling fans, and ST followers were passionately convinced that Lance was clean, until the very bitter end. This blinded passion was driven because everyone thought he was a great guy, which was also proven to be untrue. The obvious, physiological evidence that Lance was doping was publicly known since the mid 90’s, but NOBODY wanted to accept it.
- The reality is, no one, other than the athlete in question and people directly working with the athlete know whether he or she is doping or not, yet all of us have opinions. As none of us have objective evidence, we form a subjective opinion that is largely based on emotion. Do we like or dislike the athlete? Do we believe or not believe a given performance was possible? Mostly the like/dislike seems to dominate.
Specifically to Weiss, when considering his known doping period to current-
- his swimming is essentially the same- 3rd pack pro level
- his biking, in my opinion, has regressed, from OMG super biker, ie Starky, Wurf, Brownlee, Sanders, Keinle...to very, very good, as in 1-2 minutes back of those mentioned
- his running has gone from decent, to OMG super runner, ie Gomez, Sanders, Frodo, Brownlee...
- his is obviously much leaner, suggesting a change in training, and likely diet.

That is the objective data on Weiss. Does it suggest doping? As it stands, I don’t think so. If you are of the belief that once a doper always a doper, than the performances and any objective information is not relevant.

I agree and disagree. I agree that it's ineffective relative to what it's purpoted to be. But I believe sport would massively change if we stopped all testing outright. It's a form of doping regulation, which, in my opinion, is far better than nothing.



Oh heeeylll no. Go back and read all the Lance threads. As a card-carrying Lance-hater, we had a large, vocal contingent here on ST for around a decade before The Decision. I'm not sure if we were a majority, but we sure as hell weren't 1%.

Apologies for old age memory! Sure seemed like even the slightest suggestion of Lance being dirty resulted in immediate crucifiction.

just based off the picture listed without knowing the athlete and or course measures.

I would guess this could be .

[moderator's delete]

etc, etc. about 7-8 other top guys that race this way.

Point being. Why don't they get that kind of post. Seems to be more about the athlete then the numbers.

I don't like dopers just objectivity.

---

Technique will always last longer then energy production. Improve biomechanics, improve performance.
http://Www.anthonytoth.ca, triathletetoth@twitter

Because those athletes weren't already busted for blood doping?

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Yes. Not PEDs. Totally gambling. Prob bet on NBA games too.

---

http://www.TriScottsdale.org