In addition to the long list of pro cyclists being prohibited from racing because they were caught doping, a friend and former pro cyclist pointed out that the pro cycling peloton has had a long list of dopers that have recently returned to racing. For example, just last week it was reported that Danilo Di Luca is ready to return to the peloton after serving his suspension. Di Luca is only one of many high profile pro racers that have returned recently including Alexander Vinokourov, Ivan Basso, Riccardo Ricco, Michael Rasmussen, Stefan Schumacher, Alessandro Petacchi and numerous others who are not as high profile.
My friend also asked a very good question about this observation. He said: "Why don't the clean riders refuse to race with these guys?" He continued by saying that the racers should just protest that the dopers are returning and proclaim that they won't race against cheaters!
There are several possible reasons why the clean riders in the peloton are not being more vocal including the possibility that there aren't enough clean pro cyclists to put their foot down. However, putting aside the option of refusing to race, I wonder if the pro cyclists who are clean and have raced clean for their careers couldn't be more instrumental in cleaning up the sport if they were more vocal. For example, these riders could petition the UCI to make the sanctions longer, instead of the opposite trend of short sentences. In this regard, Pat McQuaid stated this week that the UCI would support four year bans. An article covering McQuaid's statements in VeloNation says that the longer bans have been an option for some time but no sanctions over two years have been given out. Why not?! If I was racing in the pro peloton, I would be lobbying for the UCI to get with it and give out the four year sanctions. Walk the talk McQuaid! Let's get serious.
Sadly enough, it may be that the clean riders are too far down in the pecking order to have much influence. After all, if doping improves your performance as much as they claim it does then the clean guys are probably domestiques who would be quickly replaced if they put their foot down. That's a pitiful possibility that may be the most likely reason given that the top racers seem to have a pretty poor record when it comes to doping. As more of the top riders dope, it puts pressure to dope on anyone who wants to compete at the pro level making it hard to even be a domestique without doping.
Whether there is just one or 100 of these riders in the pro peloton, the clean riders need to stand up and be counted. If they did then they might just find they are more competitive than they thought. If they were shunned and knocked off by the cycling mafia then so be it. There is more to life than being a domestique (or a yellow jersey winner) in a corrupted sport...
I think the only way to truely clean up the sport, make doping a lifetime ban. Zero tolerance!
ReplyDeleteGary, I think a lifetime ban ought to be instituted for clear cut cases. However, there are some cases where we just don't know for sure what happened. Even the Contador case leaves some doubt as to whether he was guilty of taking clenbuterol. Even though I believe he is guilty of blood doping, and I doubt very much that he has been a clean cyclist, I can envision a case where a clean rider had a false positive. In those cases, I would vote for a lesser ban. Otherwise, if it's clear cut--get them out of the sport!
ReplyDeleteMark, I agree! they ought to have a lifetime ban as an option for clear cut doping. I'm really not aware of any false positives that have been unfairly given. It seems like most if not all that initially claim to be falsely accused, ultimately end up admitting to cheating. It seems to me that they are overly protective of false postives in taking two samles etc.. Tyler Hamilton was allowed to keep his Olympic Gold medal even though his A sample was positive and they screwed up the B sample. Turns out, he was guilty too!
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can get offered a pro contract these days unless the team directors know that you're "cool" (if you know what I mean).
ReplyDeleteLandis explained this past May that he was offered a slot on USPS and was a minor player until one important day. He went to Johan and quite deliberately said "Johan, can you help me? I want to ride the Tour, I want to get better and I'm willing to do literally anything needed in order to get there." That's about the extent of all it takes for a rider to say that he's willing. Soon after this, he started getting invites to train with Armstrong. And it grew from there. One day, Lance supposedly tossed a bunch of testosterone patches his way and that was the beginning. He was a "made guy". He asked, they probed, and once they trusted him, they let him in. And it was a one-way door.
It was the doped teams in the 90's that would decide to get a doping program and then just impose it on everyone. That didn't work well. Word got out. That's what led to the big Festina bust. Clean riders didn't like their directors forcing them to ride dirty, so they tipped authorities. And that forced the practice to be more underground.
Nowadays, they identify new riders who are not only good, but with the added attitude of "willing to do whatever it takes". And then they wait for these riders to step-up and ask to be let into the underground.
Anyone remember Prentice Stephan? He was the team doc for USPS, and some years ago, he charged that he'd been approached by several riders (including Hamilton and Livingston) looking for help with EPO. He declined. Later he was fired.
Rhid, I've never heard of Prentice Stephan. I did a search and found a few forums that talk about him. Can you point us to any other sources such as mainstream news?
ReplyDeleteMark, I'm sure you heard of this altercation between Steffen and Jemison in 2008:
ReplyDeletehttp://velonews.competitor.com/2008/08/road/old-doping-accusations-lead-to-altercation_82154
Piotrek, I do remember it now that I read your link. Interesting...Thanks for jogging my memory.
ReplyDeletePiotrek, I saw the thread discussing that incident and found the following quote from an amateur racer truly amazing and very disappointing: "I consider Marty a friend and support him 100%. Do I think he was doping? I don't care. And if he did, I don't blame him. In fact, since he was racing in Europe in the late 90's, I'd expect him to. For that matter, I don't blame anyone who was doing just what everyone else was doing. If I had to make a decision between staying clean and losing a job or doping like everyone else and keeping food on the table for my family, I'd say 'where's the needle, doc?'"
ReplyDeleteWow--what a statement. This attitude is the reason why doping is so widespread in cycling. I can't believe that an amateur racer would express this attitude. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised given that Joe Papp has a long list of dopers in the amateur and Masters ranks. Your response to this comment was awesome!
Thank you. I wish more people weren't afraid to express similar sentiments. I'm glad you're doing what you're doing here.
ReplyDeleteBy "similar sentiments" I meant similar to mine, not the amateur racer in question. ;-)
ReplyDeleteThe Prentice Stephan(sp?) case is a really great example of "shoot the messenger" and how the early whistle-blowers got really badly screwed. I think the situation was such that they assumed the doc was "cool" and it turned out he wasn't. They tossed him out and really ran him through the ringer after he went public. Remember, back then they were the "Apple Pie" boys defending American values in the world sporting spotlight.
ReplyDelete