Weight Weenies

fa63 wrote:Honestly, I don't really respect anyone in professional cycling anymore. Well, maybe except for Marianne Vos. To me, men's cycling is like fake American wrestling; it can be good entertainment, but (most) everyone knows it is fake.

Take it back, Wrestlin! is not FAKE!!


I hope you get my humor in this.

HUMP

Would Pantani have inspired anyone at all were it not for his dope-fueled racing? The Giro will truly be honoring PEDs in 2014.

And spare me the "victim" BS. Should Michael Jackson be remembered as the victimized King of Pop? Or as a child molesting weirdo? I vote for the latter. You're accountable for your actions, no matter the circumstance; hardly a super-human standard of morals.

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

Rick wrote:

tymon_tm wrote:i think we can all agree that Pantani's cult is mainly a local thing, .....

A "local thing" like only the inhibitants of the planet "Earth" ?

local as i'm sure we all recognize him as a great cyclist, but not necessarily build him monuments, make films about his life or mention his 'legacy' (???) every time the road starts going up during the Giro. like he was some Elvis of cycling

i really do understand why Italy's proud with his achievements - it's just another national hero cliche. but in this very case IMO Giro organizers demonstrate some poor sense of propriety. just when the whole cycling world is all about riding clean (no matter how hypocritical it is...) they dedicate their national tour to a convicted doper

Pantani, Jimenez and VDB's were all young men who did nothing different from many of our 'heros' of the era yet died young because they were caught. I am not condoning doping, but no one deserves even close to what they went through for cheating in sport.[/quote]

Can't say I agree with this. These men died because they had drug addictions and mental problems. I'm not trying to be cruel, but lots of other people got popped for drugs, they served their suspensions and moved on with their lives in one way or another. Some even determined that they had more to give in cycling, and returned to the sport.

it is to unfortunate that these people died, but the "torture" they endured was self inflicted, and probably drove them to dope in the first place.

Not sure why people are so shocked by the Giro and Pantani, on the Tour podium this year we saw Mercx and Indurain up there being flaunted to the crowd as the 'hero's' they are.

AGW wrote:Would Pantani have inspired anyone at all were it not for his dope-fueled racing? The Giro will truly be honoring PEDs in 2014.

And spare me the "victim" BS. Should Michael Jackson be remembered as the victimized King of Pop? Or as a child molesting weirdo? I vote for the latter. You're accountable for your actions, no matter the circumstance; hardly a super-human standard of morals.

Michael Jackson broke sales records in dozens of markets across the world. He was also never formally convicted of child molestation even for how weird his antics were. He was also the first African American pop star to transcend genres and boundaries. People love to rattle on him and Whitney Houston, but praise Johnny Cash- a bonafide racist, alcholic, drug user who had many of the same problems.

Anyways, yes, Pantani would've probably been good had he not doped. Even in races as a junior he was capable of pretty incredible climbing feats. So many people here sit on the sidelines but don't bother to remember that most professional athletes are young, immature, impressionable, and naive and more often than not make some sort of sportsmanship, financial, criminal, or rules-based mistake early in their career. The prevalence of steroid use in high school football and baseball as well as in the NCAA is a testament to this fact. So are all the players that manage to blow through millions of dollars doing whatever heap of stupid shit they end up doing. My examples are really limited to my own country but I'm sure there are similarities in European Football, Rugby, Cricket, and whatever other sports people in the rest of the world watch.

With that said to even get to the level where you're a doped up pro means you need some talent. As we now know from many pro testimonies you can dope and actually not be good or fast. This is why Tom Danielson never big ringed up the Hautacam or Levi never won a GT. The greats all had a specific base level of talent before they used.

I can acknowledge MJ's success all day but still comfortably lampoon him for his drug use and well-established child mongering, just like plenty here turned their noses up at Armstrong when the only evidence available against him was hear-say and armchair analysis of his performance.

The bottom line is that the moments most people will remember about Pantani were when he was doped. He lit up a climb like none other, but even a talented doper is still violating the spirit of sportsmanship and competition.

It's a shame more here don't see it this way. It's how I know the sport can never move beyond this so-called "doped era". There's always a whiff of moral relativism or rationalization, all covered in a thin patina of gentlemenly discourse.

I honestly don't care about doping. It has and always will be present in every sport. It is what it is, no need to constantly create divisions between eras or athletes.

Fair points spud. They did have documented mental issues. To elaborate, my point is that I find it odd how that the Garmin boys and others are praised and celebrated for selling out LA while the attitude that prevailed in the 90's towards guys who broke the rules seem to linger. It disappoints me that Pantani is still treated like a criminal on this board while others who "confess" are treated differently.

To elaborate, I think it helps to look at the historical context surrounding Pantani et al. Do you remember cycling back in the late 90's? It was a lot different from today's climate where truth and reconciliation are on the table and guys "confess", release books on core strength, serve suspensions, and are cheered to victory in ToU all in less than the span a year. Point being it was different set of rules back then and when the riders I referenced were popped it was a different time. You were banished from the sport and labelled an outlier by your team and country in the name of self preservation for others. There was no Garmin to go to.

No doubt those guys had other issues but I think it's sad the way people remember them as morally corrupt criminals. I would argue that were they riding today things might have been different.

AGW wrote: It's how I know the sport can never move beyond this so-called "doped era". There's always a whiff of moral relativism or rationalization, all covered in a thin patina of gentlemenly discourse.

I'd call it looking at the broader picture and not simplifying things to a binary point of view. Doping in cycling didn't just suddenly start in 1996. I'd also never say "I know" about something this complex but that's another thing.

Point being, things are a little more complicated than just the good guys and bad guys stance.

Also, MJ was a total weirdo which I remember but I'm also able to appreciate that his music is amazing.

ultyguy wrote:That's just a GF with canti mounts and a hole drilled thru for the rear cable, no?

Pretty much. but I'm wondering if it is whole new internal cable routing for that coming out the seat tube? Would also like to see how much tire clearance there is on this compared to the GF01

KB wrote:At the end of the day, you either accept or reject the results. Just put an asterisk against the whole lot because that’s been the reality.
The Giro has the Cima Coppi despite him stating he took drugs almost always. Bobet was implicated. Anquetil was open about it. Hinault refused dope tests. Merckx was nabbed, so was Gimondi, Altig (who Simpson beat in 65 at the Worlds), Motta, Adorni. The list is endless. The Tour introduced its own drug tests in 1966 and the riders went on strike; the riders view being that they had an entitlement to get through it.
Personally, I have no problem in accepting Pantani, I feel pity for him that it drove him over the top to what was effectively a drawn out suicide. He considered that he took the rap for all the others that were at it.
For the same reasons I will also accept all the results because nearly every winner and contender was nabbed later or heavily implicated. Yes, of course it’s not right, but where do you draw the line? Someone gets a lifetime ban because he’s an arsehole, another fesses up later and gets a 6 month ban. Are they both not equally guilty?

Spot on, Marco Pantani would have had the same advantage if nobody had been on epo in the 90's

Marco Pantani doped his way to stardom & I doubt he ever raced with just bread & water. It was absolutely tragic when he killed himself, but I'm a hypocrite because if Lance Armstrong bought the farm I'd jump for joy

You clearly are an ignorant of his career pre-stardom. He was one of the most promising junior riders in Italy since he started. He finished top 3 in the Baby Giro (1st, 2nd, and 3rd) as a junior. He also had quite a few other victories to his palamares and put his dues in before he could likely even afford to live let alone buy dope.

Visit starbike.com Online Retailer for HighEnd cycling components
Great Prices ✓    Broad Selection ✓    Worldwide Delivery ✓

www.starbike.com

"[Michael Jackson] was also the first African American pop star to transcend genres and boundaries."

I think there were a few before him.