Is pro cycling finished

stumps wrote:

daddyELVIS - this is the problem as i see it. In your view if your connected in any way, shape or form with Sky you are a doper, simple as that, no ifs no buts you are a cheat and a doper.

So far, since Sky have been a team, i cant recall any of their riders failing a drugs test. I'm not talking about JTL as that was before he joined or Rogers as that was after he left and was with Saxo, so unless you are really really paranoid about Sky or are some sort of psychic i cant fathom where you get your info from that they do cheat.

I think i know the answer though..............

Nope, never said that at all.
What I have said is that doping is rife at the pinnacle of pro sport, especially where the bucks are big! Therefore, it is safe to assume that many champions are dopers. That said, and from what I've seen since the formation of Sky, my view is that they are hypocrits! That is the only crime I can level at them - whether anything more serious ever comes to light, only time will tell.

Kadinkski wrote:

No, that's not what I'm saying. There are countless athletes at the top of their game not doping, I would actually say the majority of athletes at their absolute pinnacle are not doping. I'm saying that a small minority of athletes in any given distance event are doping - and those are the world beaters, the absolute elite of the elite, the top 20%.

Any successful doping program is tailored towards that athlete's specific biochemistry, weaknesses, training program, anticipated anti-doping controls etc. My argument is about sport in general; It's pointless for me to say what I think one specific person is on as it would be 100% wrong. It's like me asking you what you think athlete Y's natural nutritional intake is, or what athlete X's training program is. It doesn't prove anything and steers the argument away from that which I am making.

You are saying the all of the top 20% of distance athletes are definitely doping - i'm saying that's nonsense. I'm not saying that doping doesn't exist, nor that doping in some sports is absolutely rife at the top-level. I'll relax my question if you want - are you absolutely convinced Wiggins is doping ? Beyond that, as Iamnot Wiggins said, it's a tired old discussion and I can't be arsed.

fukawitribe wrote:

Kadinkski wrote:

No, that's not what I'm saying. There are countless athletes at the top of their game not doping, I would actually say the majority of athletes at their absolute pinnacle are not doping. I'm saying that a small minority of athletes in any given distance event are doping - and those are the world beaters, the absolute elite of the elite, the top 20%.
...

You are saying the all of the top 20% of distance athletes are definitely doping - i'm saying that's nonsense. I'm not saying that doping doesn't exist, nor that doping in some sports is absolutely rife at the top-level

Edit : that would be "nor that doping in some sports isn't absolutely rife at the top-level".

stumps wrote:

.........and so was his other big hero, Paul Weller, so Big Mig proves what exactly

I just wonder how to decide which dopers are heroes and which are villains? Associating with dodgy doctors seems ok on the Wiggo-scale.

fukawitribe wrote:

Thank fuck for that, I thought for a moment some logic was going to be introduced into the discussion. By the way, just for record, what drugs do you think Wiggins was using for the hour attempt ?

Ah, you pulled your head out of your book of fairy tales! Don't know if he was doping or not for the hour. But he was sure pleased his hero, Big Mig was there to see him do it!

daddyELVIS wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

Thank fuck for that, I thought for a moment some logic was going to be introduced into the discussion. By the way, just for record, what drugs do you think Wiggins was using for the hour attempt ?

Ah, you pulled your head out of your book of fairy tales! Don't know if he was doping or not for the hour.

I'm not pretending cycling's clean, far from it, but you do know he's doping because everyone at the top of their game in cycling is, as you keep saying, everyone. So, MTFU and say which ones you reckon he's on or realise that in a non-fairy-tale world there's inevitably a bunch of cheats and some who aren't.

fukawitribe wrote:

daddyELVIS wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

Thank fuck for that, I thought for a moment some logic was going to be introduced into the discussion. By the way, just for record, what drugs do you think Wiggins was using for the hour attempt ?

Ah, you pulled your head out of your book of fairy tales! Don't know if he was doping or not for the hour.

I'm not pretending cycling's clean, far from it, but you do know he's doping because everyone at the top of their game in cycling is, as you keep saying, everyone. So, MTFU and say which ones you reckon he's on or realise that in a non-fairy-tale world there's inevitably a bunch of cheats and some who aren't.

I never said they dope all the time, so again I can't say if he dope for the hour. What I will say is the the hour was much more believable than the Tour victory, and the 2012 season as a whole!

fukawitribe wrote:

daddyELVIS wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

Thank fuck for that, I thought for a moment some logic was going to be introduced into the discussion. By the way, just for record, what drugs do you think Wiggins was using for the hour attempt ?

Ah, you pulled your head out of your book of fairy tales! Don't know if he was doping or not for the hour.

I'm not pretending cycling's clean, far from it, but you do know he's doping because everyone at the top of their game in cycling is, as you keep saying, everyone. So, MTFU and say which ones you reckon he's on or realise that in a non-fairy-tale world there's inevitably a bunch of cheats and some who aren't.

I never said they dope all the time, so again I can't say if he dope for the hour. What I will say is the the hour was much more believable than the Tour victory, and the 2012 season as a whole!

stumps wrote:

Do you not watch big movies or top tv programmes either as a lot of the "A-list" actors take illegal substances and alcohol or do you all turn a blind eye to that ?????????

Hmmm not very logical thinker here or lack of IQ?

Actors take illegal substances or and alcohol doesn't make them act better or give them an edge against other actors. If anything other actors would love the others to kill themselves with drugs and alcohol.

hsiaolc wrote:

stumps wrote:

Do you not watch big movies or top tv programmes either as a lot of the "A-list" actors take illegal substances and alcohol or do you all turn a blind eye to that ?????????

Hmmm not very logical thinker here or lack of IQ?

Actors take illegal substances or and alcohol doesn't make them act better or give them an edge against other actors. If anything other actors would love the others to kill themselves with drugs and alcohol.

I was actually being petty just like most of the comments on here, obvious your IQ was not upto understanding that. So i'll make it simpler for you -

"SHIT HAPPENS" so why get uptight about something you have no control over, now did you understand that.

Kadinkski wrote:

“I believe that it is currently difficult to be among the top five in the world in any of the distance events without using EPO or human growth hormone. While some of the top athletes may be clean, so many athletes are running so fast that their performances are suspect"

Alberto Salazar, 2001

Now, 15 years later, I believe it would be accurate to change "difficult" to "impossible" and "the top 5" to "the top 20%" and "distance events" to "any sport".

So, just to really nail this down, you're saying that 20% of the top professional cyclists are using EPO or HGH ?

fukawitribe wrote:

So, just to really nail this down, you're saying that 20% of the top professional cyclists are using EPO or HGH ?

Yes, that's correct. But I'm not having a pop at cycling specifically - I'm saying that to be in the top 20% of athletes in the world at any given distance sport, to be within the absolute elite of the elite, you have to be on the gear.

Kadinkski wrote:

fukawitribe wrote:

So, just to really nail this down, you're saying that 20% of the top professional cyclists are using EPO or HGH ?

Yes, that's correct. But I'm not having a pop at cycling specifically

No, I didn't think you were - just wanted to clarify it in one particular.

Kadinkski wrote:

- I'm saying that to be in the top 20% of athletes in the world at any given distance sport, to be within the absolute elite of the elite, you have to be on the gear.

OK.... and I personally think that's so unlikely as to be borderline tin-foil, but each to their own, we have no proof either way.

FWIW I remember back in the seventies and eighties when I well into my running that we knew that it was rife in the upper tiers of athletics and that some of the teams had had reasonably modern and systemic doping schemes - even then nobody doubted that some of the top flight were actually clean... some people just are shit hot athletes and some are shit hot athletes that have been trained really well, it happens.

ianrobo wrote:

But I think if people saw and was proved most cheat then pro sport is finished.

people want to be entertained, the details aren't relevant.