Compare and contrast.

Michael Press said:

One thousand words due Monday 25 September 2006.

"A former employee of Richard Childress Racing say in a
wrongful termination lawsuit that the team used illegal
engine modifications at this year's Dayton 500 events,
including the car of polesitter Jeff Burton.

When Childress was told of the problem, the owner
responded by saying: `All teams do something to enhance
performance,' according to the Charlotte Observer."

--
Michael Press

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

"Scott" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

What if the car crashes due to the PEs?

Scott said:

Michael Press said:

One thousand words due Monday 25 September 2006.

"A former employee of Richard Childress Racing say in a
wrongful termination lawsuit that the team used illegal
engine modifications at this year's Dayton 500 events,
including the car of polesitter Jeff Burton.

When Childress was told of the problem, the owner
responded by saying: `All teams do something to enhance
performance,' according to the Charlotte Observer."

--
Michael Press

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

The car can kill you, too.

And driver safety is a big part of the NASCAR rulebook. Especially
after Dale Earnhardt died.

So, let's continue to explore the reality that the beer-gutted,
greasy-fingered, cousin-marryin', WalMart-shoppin' rednecks do a
magnificently better job policing their sport than do their
sophisticated, smart-dressing, urbane counterparts in "athletic"
sports. (sarcasm off)

Note, there has been at least one "lifetime ban" for illicit drug use
in NASCAR. They handled that one in the usual manner, with a total
minimum of bad PR. IOW, with no major sponsors or news media jumping
off the ship, or years of appeals and lawyers getting richer.

Isn't [censored] "get me a positive reader" Pound a lawyer by trade? --D-y

Scott said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

So doping under a physician's supervision oughta be OK?

On 22 Sep 2006 09:05:36 -0700, "Scott" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

Actuall there are a number of differences, any one of which can
account for the variance in the sporting public's reaction to the
news:

- an engine is not a human being
- the human "engine" is a much bigger factor in the outcome of a
bicycling race (this is debatable, so ask a Nascar crew chief which he
would rather have this weekend - a car with 50 less horsepower or a
car with a right front tire running 1 lb. low on air pressure)
- Nascar's culture has an honored tradition of cheating without being
caught. Nascar manages it very well - by punishing those not smart
enough to not be caught.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Darryl Mataya said:

On 22 Sep 2006 09:05:36 -0700, "Scott" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

Actuall there are a number of differences, any one of which can
account for the variance in the sporting public's reaction to the
news:

- an engine is not a human being
- the human "engine" is a much bigger factor in the outcome of a
bicycling race (this is debatable, so ask a Nascar crew chief which he
would rather have this weekend - a car with 50 less horsepower or a
car with a right front tire running 1 lb. low on air pressure)
- Nascar's culture has an honored tradition of cheating without being
caught. Nascar manages it very well - by punishing those not smart
enough to not be caught.

The NASCAR rule for determining the winner of a race is
`first across the finish line'. Sanctions are imposed for
rule infractions that are detected, same as everywhere.

Of course, NASCAR drivers do not take banned drugs. I know
this because they are not routinely sanctioned for taking
them.

--
Michael Press

Darryl Mataya said:

On 22 Sep 2006 09:05:36 -0700, "Scott" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

Actuall there are a number of differences, any one of which can
account for the variance in the sporting public's reaction to the
news:

- an engine is not a human being
- the human "engine" is a much bigger factor in the outcome of a
bicycling race (this is debatable, so ask a Nascar crew chief which he
would rather have this weekend - a car with 50 less horsepower or a
car with a right front tire running 1 lb. low on air pressure)
- Nascar's culture has an honored tradition of cheating without being
caught. Nascar manages it very well - by punishing those not smart
enough to not be caught.

In any race there's a significant portion of the field with no realistic
expectation of winning. I think that applies to any sport. I'm willing to bet
that in Nascar damn near every one of those guys is cheating like mad. Not to
win (they'd be torn down and disqualified) but to keep running mid pack a lot
cheaper and easier than doing it legal.

No cyclist would think like that.

Ron

In article <80UQg.3598$vC3.3366@dukeread02>,

Carl Sundquist said:

"Scott" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

What if the car crashes due to the PEs?

Assuming your question is serious, the answer is that NASCAR takes
saftey-type violations deadly seriously:

http://nascar.about.com/b/a/150489.htm

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Michael Press said:

One thousand words due Monday 25 September 2006.

"A former employee of Richard Childress Racing say in a
wrongful termination lawsuit that the team used illegal
engine modifications at this year's Dayton 500 events,
including the car of polesitter Jeff Burton.

When Childress was told of the problem, the owner
responded by saying: `All teams do something to enhance
performance,' according to the Charlotte Observer."

NASCAR ?? I mean really who gives a [censored].

Bill

--

William R. Mattil : http://www.celestial-images.com

In article
<[email hidden]>,

William R. Mattil said:

Michael Press said:

One thousand words due Monday 25 September 2006.

"A former employee of Richard Childress Racing say in a
wrongful termination lawsuit that the team used illegal
engine modifications at this year's Dayton 500 events,
including the car of polesitter Jeff Burton.

When Childress was told of the problem, the owner
responded by saying: `All teams do something to enhance
performance,' according to the Charlotte Observer."

NASCAR ?? I mean really who gives a [censored].

I care, that is why I posted it. You do not care. I accept
that.

--
Michael Press

William R. Mattil said:

NASCAR ?? I mean really who gives a [censored].

Well, you've heard of them, while I think it's a safe bet they've never
heard of you.

Giving a [censored] about my sport, which is really being harmed by whacko*
"anti-doping crusaders".

*(see "Pound, altitude tents unnatural"; also, "When is this going to
stop?" quote IRT the Landis "positive". Whacko.).

NASCAR does not operate under the delusion that competitors, in the
real world of men, will not relentlessly seek any advantage.

NASCAR polices itself without driving away sponsors or teams, and
without kicking out star drivers on the eve of major competitions
(duh!).

Testing protects the health of the riders? Maybe not even that:

ms-se.comabstract.00005768 200606000 00005.htm;jsessionid=FV9M3MM7zgyj0Gg1Tgd8b2nrbpXVPJLL6YppX8t2psNn9JdJby1Open ↗

TinyURL: http://tinyurl.com/egyz6

--D-y

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Scott said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference
in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

So doping under a physician's supervision oughta be OK?

Good point. The real reason is because in both cases, it's furking
cheating

Phil H

Phil Holman said:

"Robert Chung" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Scott said:

I know where you're going with this, BUT... there's a big difference
in
pushing the technical limits of what they'll let you do to the engine
of a car AND taking performance enhancing drugs that may kill you.

So doping under a physician's supervision oughta be OK?

Good point. The real reason is because in both cases, it's furking
cheating

Since testing is apparently so ineffective at catching dopers, and the
cops won't likely find them all, either, riders are put in a situation
where they might have a choice between a career and no career,
depending on choice of training regimen and personal care.

What happened to "lead us not into temptation"?

Where is the virtue in making rules that can't in the least be enforced
fairly?

I'm not saying I have "the" answer. To the contrary, this is an
unsolveable problem IMHO. Piling up rider bodies isn't going to fix it
or make it go away.

Culpability of the rules makers and enforcers is not being reflected in
the current goings-on.

It's easy to disparage "dopers". Here, let's put 10 or 12 million bucks
on the table for you to be tempted by. Not to mention, as I've said
previously, fame/name in the record books/enlarged mating pool. OK, 20
million... IOW, what's *your* price?

Be honest <g>. --D-y