Professional Cycling · Public discussion

Interesting Observations

Started by limerickman · · Last activity · 46 posts · 4,818 views

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
Professional Cycling
Published
9 August 2004
Last activity
12 August 2004
Original author
limerickman
Posts
46
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
4,818
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 21–40 of 46
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. gntlmn said:

    You frequently use the palmares argument against Lance Armstrong as well. You say that he's not such a great cyclist as some former greats because he does not have such an impressive palmares. This argument is akin to saying that someone who wins the 100 meters (track) at the Olympics is not all that great because he didn't participate in a local meet in your hometown last week. It's kind of a manipulative ploy, this whole palmares issue. You use it against the athletes' natural tendency to want to be the best in the best race and earn the most income the sport has to offer. You would prefer that they water down their talents to bring more income to the other events. I don't have a problem with the best athletes avoiding lesser known and less prestigious competitions to be in their best form for the grandest.

    As for impressive palmares, if you fall for the doping pervasiveness argument, as you seem to, those with the most impressive palmares are most likely to be the ones doing the most doping. Otherwise, their performance would suffer. So I don't know why you would use palmares as a badge of honor. Even if it isn't a result of doping, an impressive palmares likely will lead to an earlier retirement. The undrugged body needs to rest.

    Please see message 20 : this thread was not created by me to discuss
    drugs or doping.
    I twas created to show people in this Forum how the wider (non-cycling)
    public view our sport.

    I will discuss doping with you elsewhere but not here (see my message 3,
    6 and 20 on this thread) !

  2. kuhlpinkdash said:

    Yeah, you might want to chill out a bit gntlmn...I just read the first post and it seemed pretty innocent to me,, A lot of media sources share resources so if you have several stories reporting similar things it normally means a general view has formed or may be starting to form...That is certainly true in the case of Australian Cycling. In the past few weeks, amid a degree of factual evidence, the belief that drugs are commonly used has increased immensely,, fortunately there doesn't seem to be any links to any tour riders

    I know, "from anecdotal evidence" that a lot of people I know think that cycling for 6 hours would be impossible..let alone the 400km a day they used to do in the early tours...

    Hmm I wonder if they had even invented drugs back then? Maybe some sort of:

    **Longmuir's Patented Whisscoughing Detraction Powder**
    Guaranteed to Increase your Plasto-Glytens by 10%

    This post was limerickman's response to his claim in another thread that the general public outside of the cycling public perceives that doping is pervasive in the sport. I pointed out to him on that thread that this pervasiveness is mostly a media fascination, not a result of a stretch of the general public's imagination. He chooses to distort the issue and post here instead, his "observations", cleverly including the doping comments by a member of the press.

    To conclude that the media fascination with the drug issue is an indication that the general public is convinced of pervasive drug use in cycling is not at all a foregone conclusion, and yet lim equates these as one and the same.

  3. gntlmn said:

    This post was limerickman's response to his claim in another thread that the general public outside of the cycling public perceives that doping is pervasive in the sport. I pointed out to him on that thread that this pervasiveness is mostly a media fascination, not a result of a stretch of the general public's imagination. He chooses to distort the issue and post here instead, his "observations", cleverly including the doping comments by a member of the press.

    To conclude that the media fascination with the drug issue is an indication that the general public is convinced of pervasive drug use in cycling is not at all a foregone conclusion, and yet lim equates these as one and the same.

    Can you do me a favour ?

    Just forget about doping for one moment and read message 1.
    There is NO mention of doping or drugs.

    So stand back and read what I posted in message 1 and the respond.
    Don't link other comments in other thread to this thread (this is what I have asked you do in message 20,21).
    Then when you've considered message 1 - perhaps you'd give us your view ?

  4. The latest Bicycling magazine has an interesting story "A Gold Day in Hell", it takes a look at the course and what the riders are going to be up against. Very challenging is the impression I get. 🙂

  5. limerickman said:

    I am not getting in to a discussion about doping with you or Musette on this thread - is this understood ?

    Messages 2 and 4 are from you and Musette respectively on this thread.
    On message 4 you waded in with and I quote "How do you come to the conclusion that the wider public outside of the cycling public perceives that men/women who cycle are using substances to enable them to do so?" and
    launched ina diatribe about drugs/doping/statistics of the number of people who believe that there is widepsread doping.

    You and Musette - brought up the subject of doping on this thread, and in message 3 I said I was not discussing doping and I repeated this claim in several messages on this thread subsequently.

    You opened up the doping discussion with your opening post. Don't expect to be able to slip information past us without a response.

  6. limerickman said:

    Please see message 20 : this thread was not created by me to discuss
    drugs or doping.
    I twas created to show people in this Forum how the wider (non-cycling)
    public view our sport.

    I will discuss doping with you elsewhere but not here (see my message 3,
    6 and 20 on this thread) !

    But what you are doing is not showing how the wider (non-cycling) public view our sport. Instead, you are showing how the media views our sport. These are two different issues, and yet you treat them as one.

  7. Jakebrake said:

    The latest Bicycling magazine has an interesting story "A Gold Day in Hell", it takes a look at the course and what the riders are going to be up against. Very challenging is the impression I get. 🙂

    Maybe you might say a little more about this article. "Information at your fingertips" is giving me a little bit of trouble. Google gives me nothing. I didn't expect it to, actually. Otherwise, it might be a while before I get to the library and check out the mags there, provided I remember to look. 🙂

  8. limerickman said:


    This is how the outside world view the world of cycling.

    Tis true. During the last month I've spoken with friends, family and even co-workers about the TDF and I managed to work the drug issue into the conversation. Almost everyone thought that cycling is rife with drugs. None of these people follow cycling, they don't know about the history or the multitude of scandals.

    Its easy to dismiss their beliefs by citing their ignorance of cycling. But even if one were to believe that the sport is clean (which it isn't) the fact remains that there is a serious perception problem in the sport. Even if the public is wrong, then shouldn't cycling make attempts to correct their perception?

    People are no longer naiive about the drug issue. I should point out that this isn't just about cycling. Everyone knows it goes on in all sports. To me, this isn't even worth debating. I think its common knowledge that cycling, along with track&field, swimming and any other endurance sport is widely believed to have a drug problem. I think this knowledge has been more advanced in Europe but I think in the US now the blinders are completely off.

    What I find interesting is that since '98 TDF, the popularity of the TDF and road racing in general has actually increased. Is this solely because of Lance or is it due to the scandals themselves? Are people watching for the salacious aspect of the drug scandals? Or do fans just not care anymore whether cyclists are doping?

  9. Saucy said:

    Tis true. During the last month I've spoken with friends, family and even co-workers about the TDF and I managed to work the drug issue into the conversation. Almost everyone thought that cycling is rife with drugs. None of these people follow cycling, they don't know about the history or the multitude of scandals.

    Its easy to dismiss their beliefs by citing their ignorance of cycling. But even if one were to believe that the sport is clean (which it isn't) the fact remains that there is a serious perception problem in the sport. Even if the public is wrong, then shouldn't cycling make attempts to correct their perception?

    People are no longer naiive about the drug issue. I should point out that this isn't just about cycling. Everyone knows it goes on in all sports. To me, this isn't even worth debating. I think its common knowledge that cycling, along with track&field, swimming and any other endurance sport is widely believed to have a drug problem. I think this knowledge has been more advanced in Europe but I think in the US now the blinders are completely off.

    What I find interesting is that since '98 TDF, the popularity of the TDF and road racing in general has actually increased. Is this solely because of Lance or is it due to the scandals themselves? Are people watching for the salacious aspect of the drug scandals? Or do fans just not care anymore whether cyclists are doping?

    Well clearly the amount of media coverage to doping is completely blown out of proportion with the actual problem, as testing suggests. This media distortion, which is a result of always giving press to the doped athletes and not an equal amount of press to each and every other non doped athlete, does not ebb. And then you have people like Lim wanting to jump on the bandwagon and make more mountains out of molehills. You'd think every rider and his brother was about to keel over from a drug overdose if you listen to his tirades.

    This is why you might have people who know nothing of the sport wondering whether riders are doping. They hear these stories because the press knows they sell newspapers and newscasts. The reporters don't tell them that these stories represent less than 1 out of 1,000 professional riders in the peloton. And where's the equal press? It's not there. Now talk about bias. This is a case where an individual story is not biased because it tells the truth about a rider who doped, but it is also a case where, in the entirety of news coverage, the bias is plainly evident. If they gave equal coverage to all the non doped riders, there simply wouldn't be enough newsprint to write it all down. So they don't do it. They know that doesn't sell news.

  10. gntlmn said:

    Well clearly the amount of media coverage to doping is completely blown out of proportion with the actual problem, as testing suggests. This media distortion, which is a result of always giving press to the doped athletes and not an equal amount of press to each and every other non doped athlete, does not ebb. And then you have people like Lim wanting to jump on the bandwagon and make more mountains out of molehills. You'd think every rider and his brother was about to keel over from a drug overdose if you listen to his tirades.

    This is why you might have people who know nothing of the sport wondering whether riders are doping. They hear these stories because the press knows they sell newspapers and newscasts. The reporters don't tell them that these stories represent less than 1 out of 1,000 professional riders in the peloton. And where's the equal press? It's not there. Now talk about bias. This is a case where an individual story is not biased because it tells the truth about a rider who doped, but it is also a case where, in the entirety of news coverage, the bias is plainly evident. If they gave equal coverage to all the non doped riders, there simply wouldn't be enough newsprint to write it all down. So they don't do it. They know that doesn't sell news.

    For the umteenth time - this thread was not started to discuss doping.
    It was opened to discuss the media and general publics view of cycling.
    If you wish to discuss drugs go to the miriad of threads where doping is discussed : this is a repeat of my message in 3,20,21............

  11. Saucy said:

    Tis true. During the last month I've spoken with friends, family and even co-workers about the TDF and I managed to work the drug issue into the conversation. Almost everyone thought that cycling is rife with drugs. None of these people follow cycling, they don't know about the history or the multitude of scandals.

    Its easy to dismiss their beliefs by citing their ignorance of cycling. But even if one were to believe that the sport is clean (which it isn't) the fact remains that there is a serious perception problem in the sport. Even if the public is wrong, then shouldn't cycling make attempts to correct their perception?

    People are no longer naiive about the drug issue. I should point out that this isn't just about cycling. Everyone knows it goes on in all sports. To me, this isn't even worth debating. I think its common knowledge that cycling, along with track&field, swimming and any other endurance sport is widely believed to have a drug problem. I think this knowledge has been more advanced in Europe but I think in the US now the blinders are completely off.

    What I find interesting is that since '98 TDF, the popularity of the TDF and road racing in general has actually increased. Is this solely because of Lance or is it due to the scandals themselves? Are people watching for the salacious aspect of the drug scandals? Or do fans just not care anymore whether cyclists are doping?

    For the umteenth time - this thread was not started to discuss doping.
    It was opened to discuss the media and general publics view of cycling.
    If you wish to discuss drugs go to the miriad of threads where doping is discussed : this is a repeat of my message in 3,20,21............

  12. gntlmn said:

    Well clearly the amount of media coverage to doping is completely blown out of proportion with the actual problem, as testing suggests. This media distortion, which is a result of always giving press to the doped athletes and not an equal amount of press to each and every other non doped athlete, does not ebb. And then you have people like Lim wanting to jump on the bandwagon and make more mountains out of molehills. You'd think every rider and his brother was about to keel over from a drug overdose if you listen to his tirades.

    This is why you might have people who know nothing of the sport wondering whether riders are doping. They hear these stories because the press knows they sell newspapers and newscasts. The reporters don't tell them that these stories represent less than 1 out of 1,000 professional riders in the peloton. And where's the equal press? It's not there. Now talk about bias. This is a case where an individual story is not biased because it tells the truth about a rider who doped, but it is also a case where, in the entirety of news coverage, the bias is plainly evident. If they gave equal coverage to all the non doped riders, there simply wouldn't be enough newsprint to write it all down. So they don't do it. They know that doesn't sell news.

    I think that the media is only just beginning to devote adequate attention to the issue of doping in sport and cycling. Of course stories on this subject sell newspapers as the issue is about the integrity of athletes and their performances. To say that the testing records of athletes suggests that the media has created a mountain out of a molehill in terms of doping verges on naivety as it is becoming clear that the perceived crime amongst athletes is not doping but it is getting caught. The press and the general public are becoming increasingly aware of this.

  13. limerickman said:

    I have just been looking at the build up to the Olympic Games here in Ireland where we have our own TV stations as well as BBC, ITV etc.

    The mens Road Race is next Saturday and I was fascinated to read/hear the comments made by general (non-cycling) commentators about this event.

    One guy said "and they race - listen to this folks - for over six hours. Imagine that, having to cycle for six hours !"
    Or how about this from the TV guide for next week "9.45 GMT coverage of the Mens Olympic Road Race which is six hours +, this program will be intercut with Hockey, Volleyball and other sports. Times may vary".

    Or how about this comment from the Irish Times Newspaper "of course, the fact that the Mens Olympic Cycling Road Race is the longest endurance event
    in Athens will merely give succour to those who believe that this sport is full of endurance performance enhancing drugs.
    One cannot blame those who have this perception, after all cycling round for
    six hours in extreme heat is beyond most mortals.
    And when you consider that most of these competitors will have completed the Tour De France and have cycled about 25,000 miles already this season,
    one would have to wonder".

    This is how the outside world view the world of cycling.

    I think I took your post as intended, L-man, and thought it raised some interesting notions.
    The sources were from Irish television and press, yes? From your vantage point, does it seem like the Irish public in general is more knowledgable about pro cycling than the U.S public?

    From my standpoint here in U.S., I would expect the populace of any country with proximity to Europe to have a better awareness of cycling in general..but reading what you posted, it sounded as if your press approaches cycling with the same wide-eyed "golly gee!!" attitude as our press does (that is, when it's covered at all over here). "You mean, they ride 6 hours at a time! How is that possible! It's not human!" Please! Having said that, at least your media is talking about the cycling in the Olympics- I haven't watched much pre-Olympics coverage to this point, but I seriously doubt any US commentators are so much as mentioning the cycling events, much less speculating on them. It's not even as much as an afterthought, it's less than that. I'd love to be proven wrong on that, though.

    The mainstream coverage of cycling in the US usually is restricted to the month of July, ie the Tour, when Armstrong is winning it, and I don't recall anything other than the "wow! look what he can do!" aspect of the coverage. So,what is missing in the mainstream media cycling coverage here in the States, in general, is any insinuation that these kind of undertakings would depend on performance enhancers. The U.S. public wouldn't know enough about the pro peloton to even make a guess at whether drugs are a factor.
    Perhaps now that the doping shadow is casting a pall over our beloved "real" athletes - American footballers, baseball players, and Olympic sprinters - if the notion that cycling was full of doping were suggested in the cycling coverage that makes the mainstream media, it would probably register with more people.

    Limited as it is, it is pretty satisfying to have TdF coverage on the front of the sports section for 3 straight weeks- when people see it and ask me and other cyclists at work about the whole thing and we try not to drone on and on about what a great sport it is...
    but American's knowledge of cycling as a professional sport, however, was nicely summed up for me by a co-worker who last week asked me, quite seriously, if I would try and ride the Tour de France next year 🙄

    I didn't even blink, just smiled and replied no, and that, lack of physical abilities notwithstanding, I could no more ride the Tour than I could compete in an NBA game or in a World Cup match just because I wanted to - that it's a professional sport full of people who make their living doing nothing but this, and they are the best of best - just like the NFL or major league baseball players are at the top of their respective sports.

  14. limerickman said:

    Kate,

    When you've got to go full bore - you go full bore, Kate - trust me on this one.

    Limerick, dearest, the LAST time I followed a man's advice that started with "Trust Me", I finished the conversation in Labour & Delivery.... 😄

  15. I don't think there has been any talk about cycling in the Olympics here. Neither the local newspaper nor the news has mentioned it.

    Even during the TdF, the most I ever saw about it was maybe a 5 second clip at the end of the news, and maybe a 1/3 page article about the current stage (but I don't have OLN).

  16. Brunswick_kate said:

    Limerick, dearest, the LAST time I followed a man's advice that started with "Trust Me", I finished the conversation in Labour & Delivery.... 😄

    Very very funny ! (LOL)
    that is the best reply to any post that I have read on this Forum - very good,
    Kate !

  17. eduardoSC said:

    I think I took your post as intended, L-man, and thought it raised some interesting notions.
    The sources were from Irish television and press, yes? From your vantage point, does it seem like the Irish public in general is more knowledgable about pro cycling than the U.S public?

    From my standpoint here in U.S., I would expect the populace of any country with proximity to Europe to have a better awareness of cycling in general..but reading what you posted, it sounded as if your press approaches cycling with the same wide-eyed "golly gee!!" attitude as our press does (that is, when it's covered at all over here). "You mean, they ride 6 hours at a time! How is that possible! It's not human!" Please! Having said that, at least your media is talking about the cycling in the Olympics- I haven't watched much pre-Olympics coverage to this point, but I seriously doubt any US commentators are so much as mentioning the cycling events, much less speculating on them. It's not even as much as an afterthought, it's less than that. I'd love to be proven wrong on that, though.

    The mainstream coverage of cycling in the US usually is restricted to the month of July, ie the Tour, when Armstrong is winning it, and I don't recall anything other than the "wow! look what he can do!" aspect of the coverage. So,what is missing in the mainstream media cycling coverage here in the States, in general, is any insinuation that these kind of undertakings would depend on performance enhancers. The U.S. public wouldn't know enough about the pro peloton to even make a guess at whether drugs are a factor.
    Perhaps now that the doping shadow is casting a pall over our beloved "real" athletes - American footballers, baseball players, and Olympic sprinters - if the notion that cycling was full of doping were suggested in the cycling coverage that makes the mainstream media, it would probably register with more people.

    Limited as it is, it is pretty satisfying to have TdF coverage on the front of the sports section for 3 straight weeks- when people see it and ask me and other cyclists at work about the whole thing and we try not to drone on and on about what a great sport it is...
    but American's knowledge of cycling as a professional sport, however, was nicely summed up for me by a co-worker who last week asked me, quite seriously, if I would try and ride the Tour de France next year 🙄

    I didn't even blink, just smiled and replied no, and that, lack of physical abilities notwithstanding, I could no more ride the Tour than I could compete in an NBA game or in a World Cup match just because I wanted to - that it's a professional sport full of people who make their living doing nothing but this, and they are the best of best - just like the NFL or major league baseball players are at the top of their respective sports.

    Eduardo - top of the class !
    You have hit the nail on the head here - it's the wide eyed amazement of
    sports commentators and the public in general that I was trying to highlight
    and you have spotted this in my initial post.
    No disrespect to you but even here in Europe the general population have no idea of what cyclists do (and we're in Europe).
    I can understand how people over the pond may not be aware but when you consider that between Sean Kelly and Stephen Roche we had two Irish men
    who have, between them, won every single professional race between 1978
    and 1994 on the calendar accumulated in their respective careers, it still amazes me how the Irish media can still gawp when talking about a six hour road race !

    In fairness to you guys over where you are : cycling would probably be a very
    minor sport compared to American Football, Baseball, Basketball and Golf : so
    at least your media has some excuse.
    But ours !

    This is the debate I was trying to open up - well done Eduardo for spotting this.

  18. gntlmn said:

    Maybe you might say a little more about this article. "Information at your fingertips" is giving me a little bit of trouble. Google gives me nothing. I didn't expect it to, actually. Otherwise, it might be a while before I get to the library and check out the mags there, provided I remember to look. 🙂

    A few choice paragraphs .....

    What makes this year's contest compelling is that, unlike recent versions, a truly hard and tricky course is compounded by heat that could soar into triple digits. As the first event of the summer Games, scheduled for August 14th, the 145 -rider men's race will be a showcase for the hardship, danger, sacrifice and teamwork that make the sport exciting. The 13.2 km loop squiggles around downtown Athens, up and over the Acropolis and a steeper, neighboring hill. "I wanted to have a course in the center of the city." says Vladimir Petsas, the Olympic cycling competition manager, who designed the course, "but one that would be challenging, up to the level of the Olympic games. Because Sydney was too easy."
    The tight, twisting course, with a cobbled descent and two 90 degree corners in the last mile, promise crash-and-bash racing worthy of NASCAR--or, possibly, an epic to rival the very first Olympic road race.

    The writer then goes on to describe the first Olympic road race back in 1896 where seven cyclists lined up in Athens for what was called "the cycling marathon". The first half of the course ran across the Hymettus mountain range to Marathon(Marathon the town, from which Pheidippides had run to Athens bearing the news that the Persians had been defeated in battle--before he promptly died). Then the route returned to Athen, to the seaside Phaliron velodrome, for a total of 55 miles. That may not sound like a long way, but try it on a 40 lb single speed bike with no brakes, on stone roads, and you've got something that makes Paris-Roubaix look fairly tame. The first edition of Paris-Roubaix would be run later that April; it's infamous cobbles were the good roads then. The initial Tour de France was still seven years away.

    The writer of this article then recruited three local riders to accompany him on a single lap of the 13.2 km course (Olympic riders will circle 17 times). He writes about all the traffic they battle, expresso and pastry stops, a beer or two, and another coffee stop along the way. He then describes a certain ascent where after cranking up a few switchbacks the grade gets as steep as 12 percent. (Get away here and the peloton won't see you again). From there, the road curves around the conically shaped hill, still rising to the maximum course elevation of 184 meters. The course designer, Pestas, had wanted to run the race still higher, over the top of Lycabettus, but the UCI nixed the idea. "They said they needed to have someone to give the medals to," he said. "Not kill them all."

    The writer and the 3 other riders flew around the arcing road, and then dove left, plunging back down the sketchiest descent yet: a hard right, then a left, and down some more. He writes that it was scary enough at 25 mph; it should be quite interesting watching the pros take it at 35 mph. And from that descent, the Olympic racers will have 4 miles to chase down any breakaways before the finish.

    The Olympic riders won't be permitted to ride the course until three days before the event, when the men's and women's field will take 4 laps, with a police escort, to get to know it's tricky corners.

  19. philoakley said:

    I think that the media is only just beginning to devote adequate attention to the issue of doping in sport and cycling. Of course stories on this subject sell newspapers as the issue is about the integrity of athletes and their performances. To say that the testing records of athletes suggests that the media has created a mountain out of a molehill in terms of doping verges on naivety as it is becoming clear that the perceived crime amongst athletes is not doping but it is getting caught. The press and the general public are becoming increasingly aware of this.

    As the distortion continues to become stronger, the general public becomes more and more drawn to its spell.

    How many people, grand total, have tested positive for performance enhancing drugs? Less than 1%. To make this the grand focus of the media is deeply insulting to the other 99+% of other riders who have never doped. Their day in the sun is crowded out by those tiny fraction who cheat and who are given an unfair heavy dosage of coverage in the media. In terms of sheer numbers of clean athletes, it would be naivete to think that the doping coverage is underreported at this point. All you have to do is to look at the posts on these various forums.

  20. limerickman said:

    I
    Or how about this from the TV guide for next week "9.45 GMT coverage of the Mens Olympic Road Race which is six hours +, this program will be intercut with Hockey, Volleyball and other sports. Times may vary".

    You Irish are fortunate - they will be cutting away from the men's race. Our coverage in the US will consist of some time durin a 3.5 hr block of programming that is shared with 12 other sporting events. If anybody knows how we in the US can see the mens road race please post a response.

    There is some hope, the womens road race is being broadcast live in its entirity.

    I have not yet found any listings for the time trials.

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.