2020 Pro thread

Questions about bike hire abroad and everything light bike related. No off-topic chat please

Moderator: Moderator Team

User avatar
ave
Posts: 1880
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2008 10:15 pm
Location: Hungary

by ave

I just realized today that Tejay van Garderen was actually in the race! :O Did anybody noticed?

by Weenie


jever98
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:02 pm
Location: Seattle

by jever98

tymon_tm wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:02 am

no - I say it's just happening, whether we like it or not. I'd love people to stop cheating, stealing and doping, but that's never going to happen, such is life. embrace it and learn to enjoy pro cycling despite it, or rip you hair off everytime someone turns his pedals harder than everyone else - that's the choice we have.

as for "accepting is disguisting" - we've been here many times before, even on this board. Lance, Landis, Puerto, Beeferto, Skyerto... it's same old story all over again: an athlete gets punished, while the system doesn't even glitch. I'm all for fighting doping, not pursuing dopers and pretending it makes sport cleaner. it doesn't. it only makes athletes disposable.
This is where I deeply disagree: by "embracing " it we make people disposable. They become the human fodder for our entertainment. I agree, though, that the people behind it should be punished more severely. That Riis or Garzelli are still in the sport is disgusting.

And what makes doping different from cutting the course or using a motor? Both practices are not accepted at all, yet doping gets an "oh well" response. Because it enhances the show. And here we are at full circle again.
----
No longer in the industry

peted76
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:30 pm

by peted76

robbosmans wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:01 am

Is there a profile yet of the course?
https://www.uci.org/road/news/2020/The- ... mpionships

stoney
Posts: 301
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 11:26 am

by stoney

The reason they ascended the Colombier faster that ever was because of the Wout train pulling them up like he was leading out a sprint...which he basically was. Heck, back in the Lance days, Lance never had anyone as strong as Wout to pull him up 90% of the climbs. It's no wonder the climbing times were fast this year in the Tour...It was the Wout train pulling them at warp speed. All the top little climbing dudes had to do after he did all the work was just sprint to the top.

User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 3033
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

jever98 wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:18 am
tymon_tm wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:02 am

no - I say it's just happening, whether we like it or not. I'd love people to stop cheating, stealing and doping, but that's never going to happen, such is life. embrace it and learn to enjoy pro cycling despite it, or rip you hair off everytime someone turns his pedals harder than everyone else - that's the choice we have.

as for "accepting is disguisting" - we've been here many times before, even on this board. Lance, Landis, Puerto, Beeferto, Skyerto... it's same old story all over again: an athlete gets punished, while the system doesn't even glitch. I'm all for fighting doping, not pursuing dopers and pretending it makes sport cleaner. it doesn't. it only makes athletes disposable.
This is where I deeply disagree: by "embracing " it we make people disposable. They become the human fodder for our entertainment. I agree, though, that the people behind it should be punished more severely. That Riis or Garzelli are still in the sport is disgusting.

And what makes doping different from cutting the course or using a motor? Both practices are not accepted at all, yet doping gets an "oh well" response. Because it enhances the show. And here we are at full circle again.
moto doping is easy - it's there or it's not. with pharmaceuticals, it's "shady, complicated".. you've got various drugs or procedures, that may or may not be prohibited, and we all use that big question mark to tell ourselves it's probably all OK (while the common sense tells us otherwise - that they just cheat and try to make it look complicated to dilute any guilt or responsibility)

if it's obvious and visible, then it's an outright cheat. if it's hidden, camouflaged, put into questioning, put into context, etc, then at least some people start questioning whether it's bad or not. like corruption - if I came to city hall and handed the mayor keys to a brand new porsche asking/telling him to pass the act, I'd be put in cuffs and send to jail. if I used my buddy, who knows someone close to mayor's wife, and through some company funded her *charity*, or perhaps hired her as a "consultant", then by most people I'd be branded resourceful :lol:
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

aeroisnteverything
Posts: 442
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:43 pm

by aeroisnteverything

stoney wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:36 am
The reason they ascended the Colombier faster that ever was because of the Wout train pulling them up like he was leading out a sprint...which he basically was. Heck, back in the Lance days, Lance never had anyone as strong as Wout to pull him up 90% of the climbs. It's no wonder the climbing times were fast this year in the Tour...It was the Wout train pulling them at warp speed. All the top little climbing dudes had to do after he did all the work was just sprint to the top.
Wout is a freak of nature, but Lance and Wiggins/Froome also had incredibly strong teams around them that employed exactly the same race tactics. So this is not a new development. Guy at the front pulls at above threshold for as long as he can to put those behind them into threshold range - so that if they attack, they have to go towards VO2max power, then have to ease off later on and get caught by the train. If you have a 4+ ppl at the team with threshold watts/kg that are close to the level of elite climbers, you just use them up till they run out. By the time they do, everyone is so strung out and at their limit, that they guy with the marginally strongest threshold watts/kg wins the stage as no one has time/ability to play games anymore. You hope that guy is on your team, otherwise you end up with the Landa/Bahrain Mclaren situation. But if he is on your team, then you get Lance, Wiggins, Froome and Roglic (almost!) winning the Tour.

LiquidCooled
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:46 am

by LiquidCooled

peted76 wrote:Well I think this tour will have reset the betting odds for the World Champs at the weekend.. Hirschi, WvA, Kamna, Sepp Kuss...Hell, maybe even Pog could be up there if he recovers as well as people say.. who do we fancy to be wearing the rainbow stripes?

I don't see MdP on the start list :(

Julian Alaphilippe must be a hot favourite.. but I don't reckon he'll be up there after 18 efforts and 258km's.. (I could be eating those words)

Outside chance, Tom Pidcock who is in some flying form.

My top three.. 1) WvA 2) Hirschi 3) Pidcock (maybe not in that order)
MVdP has said he’s not doing WC. Claims the course is too climby for him. He’s focusing on Flanders and Roubaix.

I don’t know who’s going to win, but I’m expecting good performances from WvA and Dumoulin (in both TT and the road race).
2017 Giant TCR Advanced Pro 0 Disc
2003 Cannondale R1000 (CAAD7)

peted76
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Jun 23, 2014 10:30 pm

by peted76

The TT could be interesting.. it's pretty flat but it looks like it gets all technical and downhill in the last few KM's.

KB
Posts: 3959
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULL UK

by KB

tymon_tm wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 11:02 am
jever98 wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 10:51 am
tymon_tm wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 9:06 am
BUT, having said that, there's still only so much power human body can produce and sustain. no one is able to fully rest and regenerate day-in, day-out during a three week race, it's just not freakin' possible. yet, from time to time we are *to believe in miracles*. which they are, but most likely medically induced. ... as long as you don't kid yourself about *clean sport*. it's just a question of proportions. ...
Sorry, but what you say is deeply inhuman: basically, you're suggesting it's ok for people to dope, as long as the show is good. You completely disregard that many people have died because of doping. Just remember Pantani, Vandenbroucke, or the Rumsas story.

The athletes are often young people and are guided by or even pressured by their coaches, management, and don't yet have a full view of all the consequences.

It might always be an uphill battle, but the "get over it, everyone does it, that makes it ok" line of argument is disgusting.
no - I say it's just happening, whether we like it or not. I'd love people to stop cheating, stealing and doping, but that's never going to happen, ... embrace it and learn to enjoy pro cycling despite it, ... that's the choice we have.

as for "accepting is disguisting" - we've been here many times before, even on this board. Lance, Landis, Puerto, Beeferto, Skyerto... it's same old story all over again: an athlete gets punished, while the system doesn't even glitch. I'm all for fighting doping, not pursuing dopers and pretending it makes sport cleaner. it doesn't. it only makes athletes disposable.
Tymon agree. Jever. Look at the great champions: Coppi, Anquetil, Merckx, Hinault, Indurain, Armstrong et al. All dopers. I well remember the day after Simpson died. All the riders waiting for the start, all sombre and sad and all of them in the picture I remember later implicated with PED's. Sky with jiffy bags when Brailsford's words were lies. If you gave a truth drug to all ex-riders, the one's that have been caught is a drop in the ocean compared to the ones lucky enough not to get caught. Does it stop me from enjoying it. No. I work on the principle that whoever has crossed the line in Paris first has won the Tour. So, Lance, Landis and Contador can have their titles back. To affirm this, the authorities have stated 'not awarded' for the Lance years, which suggests they knew they couldn't award it because the sport was awash with drugs.

To err is to be human. Realistically you can't stop it. Try and look for a squeaky clean sport but methinks it will be a very long process in finding one.

jever98
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:02 pm
Location: Seattle

by jever98

@KB: Armstrong a great champion? LMAO. He's was a sociopathic f*ck who was very good at cycling. A great champion is something else and not just about results. Federer is one, for example.

I won't opine on the old timers, don't know enough of their history.

@tymon: what was your last point? You seemed to say that doping is just as bad as course cutting or motors, only that it's more complicated. But what does that change?
Sure, squeaky clean sport is difficult to come by. But there is a world of difference between acknowledging that and saying "they're all dirty, so let's stop this discussion"
----
No longer in the industry

User avatar
tymon_tm
Posts: 3033
Joined: Tue Sep 05, 2006 4:35 pm

by tymon_tm

OMG, calm down. "Federer's a great champ" - maybe, but don't tell me there's no doping in tennis :lol:

my perspective is simple - doping was, is and always will be present in ANY pro sport. fighting it is just for optics (in major, rich disciplines like football - on both sides of the ocean) or chasing "suspicious individuals" which - again - doesn't bring us anywhere, because it's the system that corrupts riders, not riders who corrupt the system (and don't tell me Lance is an exception - he was a promising kid once too. do you think his mom working double shifts entroduced him to drugs?)
kkibbler wrote: WW remembers.

KB
Posts: 3959
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2004 12:32 pm
Location: HULL UK

by KB

jever98 wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 1:55 pm
@KB: Armstrong a great champion? LMAO. He's was a sociopathic f*ck who was very good at cycling. A great champion is something else and not just about results. Federer is one, for example.
Regardless of your personality - in LA's case not nice to a lot of people - if you take drugs you are just as guilty as the next man. There's a strict liability to what you ingest, which shouldn't be based on personality. It's either innocent or guilty. The most notorious was probably Anquetil (brutally honest about it), but viewed by his peers as an honorable man.

The best book for lifting the lid on all of this is Tyler Hamilton's tome on the ills of PED's. Eye opening.

Cycomanic
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2020 11:10 pm

by Cycomanic

KB wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:21 pm
jever98 wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 1:55 pm
@KB: Armstrong a great champion? LMAO. He's was a sociopathic f*ck who was very good at cycling. A great champion is something else and not just about results. Federer is one, for example.
Regardless of your personality - in LA's case not nice to a lot of people - if you take drugs you are just as guilty as the next man. There's a strict liability to what you ingest, which shouldn't be based on personality. It's either innocent or guilty. The most notorious was probably Anquetil (brutally honest about it), but viewed by his peers as an honorable man.

The best book for lifting the lid on all of this is Tyler Hamilton's tome on the ills of PED's. Eye opening.
Yes Tylers book is a great read. Not just about the drug usage, but there were so many descriptions about events that I remember watching on TV and you get a behind the scence look. Also very well written.

Cycomanic
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Feb 04, 2020 11:10 pm

by Cycomanic

With regards to the people saying we should just accept it, you then need to ask up (down) to which level. Would you be ok if people dope in the amateur races you're doing (in fact we know they do). What about juniors and youth racing? What would you tell your children, when they get into the sport?

That said I do agree with the sentiment that generally the riders are small cogs in the machine and yes in other sports with more money things are likely much worse (supposedly the Fuentes investigation was quickly stopped when bags with links to Real Madrid players came to light). That doesn't mean we have to approve of it in "our" sport.

jever98
Posts: 1046
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 12:02 pm
Location: Seattle

by jever98

KB wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 3:21 pm
jever98 wrote:
Tue Sep 22, 2020 1:55 pm
@KB: Armstrong a great champion? LMAO. He's was a sociopathic f*ck who was very good at cycling. A great champion is something else and not just about results. Federer is one, for example.
Regardless of your personality - in LA's case not nice to a lot of people - if you take drugs you are just as guilty as the next man. There's a strict liability to what you ingest, which shouldn't be based on personality. It's either innocent or guilty. The most notorious was probably Anquetil (brutally honest about it), but viewed by his peers as an honorable man.

The best book for lifting the lid on all of this is Tyler Hamilton's tome on the ills of PED's. Eye opening.
I agree that you are responsible for what you take, whether you are likeable, or not. And that Tyler's book is very good.

I was objecting to the statement that LA was a "great champion". I think his bullying and the way he sought to destroy people who said the truth about him disqualify him from being a champion, regardless of results.

I get it that doping is a pervasive issue that sucks. However, I don't buy it that it's an either / or: either all doping exists, or none. I would say that there were times when it was especially bad, with a very pervasive culture. In recent years, the blood passport seemed to have helped, with things trending in the right direction, it seemed.

Whether and to which extent it remains accepted is a question of social norms and culture. Those things don't change over and won't change from "all doping" to "no doping", but might be able to change from "very much" to "not quite so much anymore". An important piece in this is how the public and the enthusiasts (i.e., us here) react to doping. If it is waived away as a petty crime, then it will never get better. If it is treated as a serious offense, it will change with enough time.

That's why I can't get behind the "get over it, everyone dopes" attitude.
----
No longer in the industry

by Weenie


Post Reply