...did the UCI get too obsessed with bikes having to look like bikes whilst rider performance could look increasingly impossible?

Were UCI commissars fretting over bottom bracket/saddle ratios when they should have been concentrating on blood bags?

No, they just always had their eye on the money.

It is a professional sport which means it is all about the $$$. You want a good show for the fans so that you make $$$. By allowing doping, you increase the performance of these athletes, just like in soccer, MMA fighting, tennis, baseball, NFL...etc. It is all about putting a show on for the fans.

To be honest, cycling of the 1990s and early 2000s was much more exciting than the last few years (except for the classics which always seem to be good for the most part).

_________________
"Let's plunge ourselves into the roar of time, the whirl of accident; may pain and pleasure, success and failure, shift as they will -- it's only action that can make a man."

Yeah, it's pretty much all about the money.
"Oh, you want to sell that brand new aero frame and have it verified by pro riders? Pay me to give your frame my blessing."
"Oh, you want to sell your sponsored brand by having your riders win events? Pay me to give your team's doping routine my blessing."
Maybe since they can't get the money direct from the sponsors from doping coverups they have to switch to extorting the bike companies for their frame and wheel certifications.
Who's more corrupt at this point? UCI or the NCAA?

But will the cash hang around if heroes come from a syringe

Is there any way that we the cycling public can petition the UCI or maybe our respective National Cycling bodies to remove the abomination that is McQuaid?

The whole organisation appears corrupt with that idiot at the helm

_________________
"We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities." Oscar Wilde

Pegoretti Responsorium
Parlee Z5i
Donhou Commuter

You really need to substabntiate things like that when you say them.....

_________________
Impoverished weight weenie wanna-be!
Budget 26" HT build viewtopic.php?f=10&t=110956

Actually, ignore me I wanted to post that in the Lance thread, my bad

_________________
"We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities." Oscar Wilde

Pegoretti Responsorium
Parlee Z5i
Donhou Commuter

Rubbish. TdF more exciting with one person dominating every year? Albeit he didn't win any of them I know.

More exciting than the TdF in 2011 (I admit 2012 was boring)?

Which races were closer?

Just perhaps you're a Lance FANBOY?

The official term is "clown".

_________________
http://djconnel.blogspot.com/
Fuji SL/1
Send your data to Weight Weenie listings!

Utter bullocks.

Cycling in the 90s and early 2000s were definitely way more exciting. But maybe you were a Lance HATER? Regardless, watching Pantani/LA/Ullrich/Beloki/Basso/Jalabert/Virenque was definitely much more exciting and enjoyable than watching Evans/Contador/Sastre/Wiggins/Schleck.

I will give you Contadoper as being an exciting rider, but the rest are meh and boring.

_________________
"Sacred to the god Aesculapius"

We need to either have everybody doping or nobody. Having only Contador/Schleck/Wiggins/Basso/Nibali doping makes for some boring racing. Of course having half the peloton crash out certainly does not make for a compelling GC competition either.

Let the juice flow , lets see if it changes the podium. The UCI can carry on as normal

2012 Vuelta is anything but boring, to make a comparison. Though to what extent riders were riding clean, is anybody guess.

TdF was a procession in the LA years (formerly known as the LA years I should say )- 2003 aside I grant you.

2011 TdF was held by many commentators to be the best in living memory, or at least for a long time (pre LA / Indurain)

It wasn't so much that one rider was exciting but that the result was in doubt right up until the end.

2012 was dull yes.

Giro in the last few years has been good, and this year's Vuelta has been the best ever (not that many people have watched lots of Vueltas).