The cutting edge of sport is about finishing first and not testing positive. The moral arguments for racing clean are all sound, but we need to be realistic. The more money there is in a sport, the more likely you are to see efforts made to beat the system.

If an undetectable illegal substance is created that improves cycling performance by 5%, I think it is naive to believe that 90% of the TdF peloton won't be using it within a year. Any athlete taking the moral high ground faces a tough reality - either improve their performance 5% by natural means (not gonna happen), take the substance, or find a new job. Then suppose that 5 years later we develop a technology to detect this new substance. Unless we have samples for the entire peloton for the past 5 years, it is probably best to not start testing old samples....

For me, a sport is defined by its rules and its technologies for enforcing the rules. Over any given season, the objective is to finish first while passing all tests for rule enforcement that are present at the time. Changing the rules or improving the enforcement technology will change behavior, but the game will be the same. Over any season, an athlete is either "clean" or "dirty" within the scope of current detection technology. If something is undetectable, I believe everyone at the front will be doing it. This is just being realistic.

I applaud efforts to improve the system to test more frequently and more thoroughly. It makes cheating harder. The result will be a cleaner sport, though probably with more sophisticated cheaters.

Is USADA gaining financially by bring about doping charges on LA or any other athlete for that matter?

"I think that at this point there are two discussions, both worthwhile having, that pollute each other: one is whether or not Lance's bust was "righteous" to use your words, and one is how to deal with AG testing."

yes, you're absolutely right. but i think there is one unifying issue: the lack of a dialogue, the lack of a check and balance, and the lack of any impetus to change that dynamic (at least until now). there have been many qualified, objective, no-skin-in-the-game descriptions of changes in the process of results management that speak to the need of some sprucing up. i think it would be nice to see those things considered and talked about not just by others talking to USADA, but by USADA answering back in an in instructive way. for example, if one of your arbitrators pens a dissenting opinion, i don't know that the best response to that is to change your arbitration rules so that dissenting opinions are not allowed.

otherwise, USADA's ombudsman is absolutely useless. he is an athlete ombudsman, but not an organizational ombudsman. let me tell you what an ombudsman does. i'm going to demonstrate.

"We have royally, as an organization, screwed the pooch in the messaging and handling of how we're going to deal with lance threads!"

that's what an ombudsman does. he speaks this truth about his own organization's mistakes. neither WADA nor USADA have that.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Well in my opinion then anyone who found to use PEDs should recieve a lifetime ban. Maybe harsher punishments would be the deterent.

I think you can set up a system whereby cheating in some way is very very risky. According to TH book, when he was riding it wasn't very risky at all.

I always get back to banning the management. Most or even none of the riders are sophisticated enough to dope without support of the team, in one way or another. And until , well, now, and thats really maybe now. Teams management has been under no threat whatsoever if a rider is caught.

So why wouldn't I as a Team owner, encourage riders to blood boost. The chances of them getting caught are small and if they do get caught, they get fired and i hire another guy. Its an inconvenience but not a big deal.

---

Styrrell

I'm having a hard time following your arguments. I see them as:

1) It happened in the past so it does not matter.
- I would respond that if we do not demonstrate that there are consequences for cheating, then there is no deterrent from cheating
2) Everyone is in it for the money
- Then why are AG'ers doping?
3) If you get rid of the money, only the athletes care (so it's not only about the money!)
- Exactly. The athletes will always care and THAT is why anti-doping efforts matter.

The fact is that for competition to be legitimate, you have to stop cheaters. If you do not stop the cheaters, there is no point in having a competition at all.

---

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

Sounds good for pro cycling. What about AG triathlon?

---

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

Link please.

---

__________________________________________________
Follow my blog - Follow me on Twitter - Facebook Page
Powered by Accelerate3

"The cutting edge of sport is about finishing first and not testing positive. The moral arguments for racing clean are all sound, but we need to be realistic. The more money there is in a sport, the more likely you are to see efforts made to beat the system."

i keep hearing it's money. but i don't know that this is the prime motivator. it's obviously not in AG racing. in pro racing, when i think of these cyclists, i don't think of them a choosing between $100,000 annual earnings and $500,000. i think they probably start doping when it's a $30,000 year, when they're between 18 and 22, with no education and no mentoring and no foundation, no sense of self, to withstand that pressure. they have no sense of whether the money for them is going to improve or not. they just want to finish higher and they're being told that this is what it takes, this is how it's done, everybody does it, don't be the only fool in the peloton.

what i do not see AT ALL at ANY level is any kind of outreach. for example, i've had several - many, actually - young pro athletes live with me over the years from time to time. i NEVER talked to ANY of them about doping, at least not that i remember. it just wasn't on my radar.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Just being picky here, but Bruyneel has not been convicted of any doping offenses, and your statement above appears to be in violation of slowman's death sentence rule.

---

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"

Like many folks, this whole situation got me thinking. I like the current/temporary new rules. The forum looks a lot cleaner, and I see more "real" triathlon discussion happening.

As for the moral debate - it's a doozy. Given that most of us are many arms' lengths away from the problem (armchair QBing... from down the street, around the corner, and in the next county) - I hope we can at least keep our heads about us. The situation will ride itself out. My sense - and correct me if I'm wrong - is that there is a tone in your writing of "Shit fellas, this is important, but ain't the end of the world. Our primary function here is a gathering place and open discussion forum about triathlon. It's getting too damn messy lately because of a single subject and select group of very vocal people. Cut that shit out." No more, no less.

But some people seem to think that's an attitude which is merely an attempt to skirt the real, apparently life-threatening issue, which is at hand (LA). Bleh. I can't get in to that debate. Just can't. So - consider this a sincere thanks for attempting to moderate an intelligent discussion on the matter.


Lastly, the situation really reminds me of this quote, below. Perhaps the surfacing of this entire 'scandal' was just a necessary stirring of the pot. And perhaps we all just need to shut the laptop lid and go for a run.

"There's always the same amount of good luck and bad luck in the world. If one person doesn't get the bad luck, somebody else will have to get it in their place. There's always the same amount of good and evil, too. We can't eradicate evil, we can only evict it, force it to move across town. And when evil moves, some good always goes with it. But we can never alter the ratio of good to evil. All we can do is keep things stirred up so neither good nor evil solidifies. That's when things get scary. Life is like a stew, you have to stir it frequently, or all the scum rises to the top." - Tom Robbins

Dan, I read yesterday's op-ed by you.

We've hashed through all of this already many times, but I'd like to make my position perfectly clear, fwiw (not much):

1. I oppose the use of drugs without a physician's prescription and approval. Doctors are and should be the gatekeepers for most of these substances. Your personal health issues should be between you and your doctor. No organization should tell you you can't compete because you are taking a prescribed medication. I regard the freedom of association to be absolute. (This is not the current legal thinking, btw. You can associate, but you can't take drugs and associate, is the current view. I happen to disagree.)

2. We are in a brave new world of manipulation of the physical characteristics of our bodies. We must adapt our organizational requirements to these changes including accepting that there are some things we cannot change. I believe drug use will never be stamped out for a variety of reasons, but mostly because the drug users can get away with it now. Some day, we won't be able to tell, except possibly by performance results, that physical manipulation has occurred and we will be back at square one.

3. The Wars on Drugs have been a collosal failure. They are a remnant of the same thinking that brought us Prohibition. We have wasted trillions of dollars and countless lives in these wars. Some people were given life sentences for simple possession here of marijuana. Parts of Mexico are full-fledged war zones because of these wars. When will people realize the wars are not worth it? The cost is too high and the benefit too low. I'd rather have my roads and air quality fixed than have purity in sport. It's that simple for me. This is simple pragmatism for a country with limited resources, but one trying to be everything for everyone. And marijuana as a PED? Credibility is destroyed with this approach. The illusion of protecting sports' purity is simply that-an illusion.

4. In a perfect world, we would have purity in sport. Until then, please do not support the Drug Warriors.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

And yet to those raised with a strong sense of values (by all accounts Landis), it still happens, or at least happened.

In my opinion, and based on the information available about many cyclists heard from their managers, coaches, and in some cases themselves; 18 is very likely 2 years later than they're starting assuming they show high potential. Im not citing names, or trying to impinge on anyone's name; merely suggesting that there are a lot of vague missives from those in the sport that it's happening even before theyre out of high school.

Translated: We can't catch them all, so fuck it why even try.

So...everyone speeds, yet they still give speeding tickets. Why even try?
We catch maybe 15% of shoplifters, which means 85% get away with it. Why even try?
Businesses and individuals dodge taxes and payments with impunity yet we still catch a few of them. Why even try anymore?

John

---

---

Top notch coaching: Francois and Accelerate3 | Follow on Twitter: LifetimeAthlete |

You're mistaken on that one. Without money involved, people still dope. And without money involved, people who care for a clean sport, well, still care.

---

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com

Busted!

---

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com

"I oppose the use of drugs without a physician's prescription and approval. Doctors are and should be the gatekeepers for most of these substances. Your personal health issues should be between you and your doctor."

i have heard of a coach who routinely sends his charges to an anti-aging clinic. it really has nothing to do with health. everything to do with performance. these aren't pros. or top AGers. it's just MOPers, BOPers. i think we should contemplate what happens if that becomes the norm - the price of excellence.

i hear you loud and clear on the blurring of the lines. for example, i think WADA had a hard time figuring out what to do about platelet rich plasma. it wasn't a performance enhancer, rather a therapy for faster recovery from an overuse injury (if it works). nevertheless, it is blood manipulation. but you're not reinjecting your own RBCs, just your platelets.

i know that the world is becoming more complicated. i see the day when doping becomes an issue of gene manipulation and then, man, i don't know what you do about that. but i also see the day when i can by a drone off amazon. hell, i can probably do that now. yes, the world is changing, and i'm ready to talk about all those changes. i'm just not ready to usher in those changes.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

http://www.cyclingnews.com/...for-refusing-to-dope

"is that there is a tone in your writing of..."

zactly.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Not to mention that speaking out usually yields nothing good unless there are major changes coming. Look at Christophe Bassons. He was
ostracized by his own team, then retired. But yes, some do care about clean sport. And it's refreshing.

---

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com

No doubt that is true, but that is foremost an issue for the health policy community, imho. And, how do you know the prescription drug had no therapuetic uses? This is the nub of it. Do we let WADA or the doctors decide what is allowed? As noted above, the current policy is you can dope but you can't dope and race. It's a hopelessly UNSUSTAINABLE position.

To Devlin:

Speeders are everywhere, despite the efforts to crack down. This has been a cultural revolution "driven" in large part by crowded highways, overworked Americans, and impatience. The solution will be automated cars and they are coming.

Tax dodgers are everywhere, and they even run for President. Are you prepared to pay more more to your local government to increase spending on police officers and the IRS to increase oversight of tax dodgers? I didn't think so.... I think spending money on WADA is worse than buying dope. At least the doper gets a transitory benefit.

-Robert

---

"How wonderful it is that nobody need wait a single moment before starting to improve the world." ~Anne Frank

Hi Dan

You can also copy/paste your reply to my comment here:

[***UNLIMITED SPACE***]

:)

Thanks

Uli

---

_________________________________________________
CAMPAGNOLO GRAN FONDO NEW YORK

Love this quote from the article as it rings so true:

What do you make of those who make the conscious and wise decision to not dope, and end up never having the chance to
give it a real try, despite plenty of talent? You know...the victims...Are they just collateral damage?

---

--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.fmcoaching.com / http://elpasotricoaching.wordpress.com

Which is why I keep saying that if you are going to take out one champion, then you need to go back and look into taking out every champion.....because when Merckx was a young cyclist, he has the example of the peers of Anquetil, and when Hinault and Fignon were young cyclists they had to beat the peers of Merckx and when Delgado and Indurain were young cyclists, they had to beat Hinault and Fignon and when Ullrich and Lance were young cyclists they needed to beat the likes of Indurain.....and so on. Every generation of young cyclists is motivated by moving up the standings to beat the champions of their time and then they are faced with getting on the same program as the champions of their time....

I remember watching an interview of a 22 year old Lance in 1994 on French TV at the Tour....Indurain was something like his 6 minute man in an ITT and blew by Lance like he was cyclotourist in Paris Brest. Lance just shook his head, and said, "these guys are superman". Anyway, this plays exactly into your point. As I said in another thread, when guys like Taylor Phinney and Teejay see Contador flying up the mountain, what type of questions do they have in their head? I'm not saying they are doping, I'm saying that when they see the champion of the day doing it "a certain way", then they have to ask themselves, "is that the train I need to get on to succeed?".