DeepCover:

I read somewhere about a survey of elite athletes who were asked if they would take something that would assure them an Olympic gold medal even if it meant that they would die from it in 5 years. I believe something like 80% said yes. And dying is a lot more serious than getting caught. When winning means everything to this degree, people will cheat.

I think it is referred to as the Goldman's dilemma, and it consistently comes out over 50%, where the general public is less than 1%. Good (or bad) insight into human nature.

I believe it is an Australian study though. Probably over 80% in Spain and Italy, eh THY?

Alexo's point of view is common among fans, but they don't understand the mind of the athlete. Like the survey paraphrased above, they will do almost anything to succeed. And cycling is doing more than any other sport to catch dopers. The current effort by the UCI, together with pressure from sponsors, is the best approach, I believe. The culture is changing slowly. Now that directors have bought into the new attitude against doping, the sport will never go back. There's nothing like the threat of losing your sponsor to make the teams take notice.

And we are a decade ahead of any other sport in addressing the problem.

Excuse me, but it's we, the fans who are paying these a***holes wages! Without bums in seats at events or watching them on TV they don't have a pro career. And for every athlete who cheats and wins, there's another athlete who should have stood on the podium, who should have got the sponsor's dollar's and the public's adulation. Oh, and I understand the mind of an athlete, I was one for 20 years, just not good enough to go pro - probably beaten there by those who cheat. It's not about understanding the mind of an athlete, it's about understanding the mind of a cheat. These are the same people lacking a moral compass that we unfortunately see in all walks of life - the bent cop, the corrupt politician taking backhanders under the table, the businessman or banker doing deals they wouldn't be proud to tell their kids about, the online scammer. "Understanding their minds", "the pressure their under", these are just weak-minded excuses. While people peddle this half-hearted sympathy for them they'll continue to feel OK about what they do and continue to cheat.

You sound like our resident guru, Samuel Lai. Here is his famous quote on the topic:

"I will report to Cervélo your, and that of the other forum member's, approval and encouragement for the use of drugs for cycling. Drugs are for losers and quitters. They have already given up. They rely on the drugs to do what they gave up doing, or gave up trying to achieve, or could not do. They are cheaters because they are incompetent and/or because they have already lost. Cheaters are losers and quitters. They've already given up the chance they might win. They've also given up trying to win. They've given up on the possibility and probability they might win."

This is classic Lai logic.

Alexo:

Excuse me, but it's we, the fans who are paying these a***holes wages!

 

Some fans, who pay good money to see you win, think you are an a**hole if you keep losing too ... you're dammed if you do, dammed if you don't. Protour teams Cofidis and BBox just lost their ProTour licenses because they didn't get a good enough rankings this year. Your best isn't good enough. Start winning or lose your job. What do you have to lose, then? The higher the stakes, the more incentive there is to cheat. As long as this attitude pervades, there it will always be a cat-and-mouse game netween the cheaters and the authorities. 

AFLD begins re-testing of 2008 Tour doping controls

UCI denies preferential treatment on testing towards Astana



Press release : AFLD report: conclusions are groundless

UCI considers new partner for anti-doping testing on French soil




Press release : Gabriele Bosisio provisionally suspended


Rebellin's future to be decided in December

AFLD President publicly criticises UCI's Tour tests

AFLD head says UCI bungled Tour testing




LPR issue their suspension to Bosisio

THY:

AFLD begins re-testing of 2008 Tour doping controls

AFLD: No new cases of doping from 2008 Tour de France

That Bordry is a megalomaniac. Like Broadbent says, AFLD's own doctors are there to conduct the tests. If a team is notified that they want to test a certain rider, and it takes up to 30 minutes or so to find him, who's fault is that, the UCI's? These guys (AFLD) just seem to lack a certain amount of professionalism. Remember that fiasco with Armstrong in April? If they don't like certain protocols, they should talk to their partners, the UCI, not blindside them by releasing a report to the media blasting them. Nowhere but France, it seems, is such childish behavior tolerated.

Hehe, nice post.


De Bonis positive for EPO

 

mudrock:

That Bordry is a megalomaniac. Like Broadbent says, AFLD's own doctors are there to conduct the tests. If a team is notified that they want to test a certain rider, and it takes up to 30 minutes or so to find him, who's fault is that, the UCI's? These guys (AFLD) just seem to lack a certain amount of professionalism. Remember that fiasco with Armstrong in April? If they don't like certain protocols, they should talk to their partners, the UCI, not blindside them by releasing a report to the media blasting them. Nowhere but France, it seems, is such childish behavior tolerated.

Why don't the Tour organizers and/or UCI use WADA (World Anti Doping Agency)? It seems to be impartial, have bleeding-edge resources and a good track record. UCI and AFLD both seem to have chips on their shoulders and given the UCI's history with doping, putting the UCI in charge of doping control is like putting the fox in charge of the henhouse. There is a suspicion that the UCI protects its stars because it is star-power that puts money in the pockets of pro cycling. Whatever the reality, there is the optics that the UCI has a conflict of interest in who is caught and who isn't.

DeepCover:

Why don't the Tour organizers and/or UCI use WADA (World Anti Doping Agency)? It seems to be impartial, have bleeding-edge resources and a good track record. UCI and AFLD both seem to have chips on their shoulders...

This is a good idea. There is obviously no trust between those two parties. The long simmering feud between the UCI and the French (ASO/AFLD) doesn't help. But the supercilious French don't want to bury the hatchet.

THY:

De Bonis positive for EPO

Man, that Gerolsteiner taught these guys some bad habits. Kohl, Schumacher, now De Bonis. Holczer must have been asleep at the switch (an old expression from my employer, the railroad). The Italian teams just aren't taking this seriously. Maybe things will change when they lose some sponsors. Is LPR going to continue?

DeepCover:

Why don't the Tour organizers and/or UCI use WADA (World Anti Doping Agency)?

I know why don't they use WADA, I think WADA should get a lot more power!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



AFLD says incongruous products found during 2009 Tour