Riding Every Day wrote:There's been a lot written about this, and a bloody sight more to come I suppose. Nothing good will come of it. I wonder what the most vocal anti-Armdstrong critics will do (if/when) the day after he's proven guilty of whatever charges might arise. Who will they turn on then?
Having said all that, I'm no big fan of Armstrong. I'm sure he'd be a fascinating individual to meet, but I'd rather meet Cadel or any one of the young Aussie blokes tearing it up these days. Australian cycling is in great shape at present. Who knows, maybe some of these young blokes started into riding due to the interest fuelled by the TdF record that Armstrong carved out?
We have a system whereby someone has been able to successfully pass over 500 test worldwide whilst being doped to the gills. Questions:
1) How is this possible?
-Are the test useless
-Do the riders have undetectable drugs, if so, who from
-Do they have masking agents, if so, who from
-Are they being tipped off to drugs tests?
-Can a rider 'buy off' a positive test?
-Is management forcing them to dope?
2) How can someone give a big cash donation to the UCI and not
3) What about the incentive structure at play?
-Test positive and stay quiet, do your two years and you are welcome back with open arms, able to earn money and pay your bills again, possibly return as a directeur to earn your crust,or,
-Come clean about how you dope and who helped you and you are shunned for having broken the omerta. Game over.
Easy choice really.
4) How will we ever get anyway in fighting doping unless we understand what facilitates it rather than blaming individual riders? Sadly for all the good things that Lance stands for (of which there are many), he and his cohort need to be exposed if we are to get anywhere
For the young riders who where encouraged into the sport by said texan rider (of which I was one) I believe most would find it preferable to never have been inspired by him if the corruption in cycling for which he is the poster boy for continues unabated.