Tour de France straining to remain credible

bicycle-forum.net
Promoting biking discussion.

Main

Date: 06 Jul 2007 07:42:44
From: Jason Spaceman
Subject: Tour de France straining to remain credible

From the article:
--------------------------------------------------------------
By Ann Killion
Mercury News
Article Launched: 07/05/2007 08:15:42 PM PDT

The biggest climb in this year's Tour de France is hors categorie. Too
difficult to classify. It is brutal, daunting. It may prove to be
insurmountable.

It is the climb up Mount Credibility.

The Tour de France begins Saturday, with the Grand Depart in London. This
year's race may kick off near the silhouette of Big Ben, but it really
starts in the shadow of Big Scandal. The fury over doping in cycling has
reached an all-time fever pitch.

The Tour opens without its defending champion wearing jersey No. 1. That's
because, in Tour officials' minds, there is no defending champion. Floyd
Landis is in limbo, awaiting the outcome of his arbitration case while
desperately pushing his new book and his proclaimed innocence. Both are a
tough sell.

Landis' dirty drug test was only the most high-profile event in a year of
doping accusations and discoveries. Which is why this Tour de France, the
94th, is arguably the most important in history. The sport and its
crown-jewel competition must reclaim credibility and legitimacy. The Tour
must be a clean and compelling event.

Can it be done? Absolutely. Unlike so many other sports, cycling's tolerance
for doping appears to be at an all-time low. Testing is improved.
Sponsorships are at stake. Teams are in disarray. The field may finally be
leveling out.

"There is no culture of doping," Landis insisted in the months since he
tested positive for synthetic testosterone after his stunning victory last
July.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Read it at http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6308521

J. Spaceman

Date: 09 Jul 2007 23:34:19
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 9:11 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> > There's no legal right to hold a UCI Director Sportif license. The UCI
> > can write or rewrite their rulebook any way the damn well please and
> > eject DS's on whatever grounds they like, including "looks like some
> > kind of prevert".
>
> I think that you are underestimating European labor law
> (including the question of whether the UCI can impose
> Common-Market-wide sanctions), but ask Sandy for
> clarification.

Once again I am twenty minutes into the future:

http://www.velonews.com/tour2007/news/articles/12643.0.html

----
The UCI on Monday called on team managers, doctors and other support
staff to follow the example set by riders and sign a landmark anti-
doping pledge.

UCI President Pat McQuaid made the appeal in a letter sent to ProTour
cycling team managers, calling on them to sign up by August 1, the
federation said in a statement.

Team staff would pledge never to encourage their riders to use illicit
substances or to close their eyes on doping cases within their team,
the UCI said.
...
Like the riders, team managers and staff would forfeit the equivalent
of a year's wages if they fail to live up to their pledge.
----

The UCI are a bunch of pansies in the punishment department, but
they're on the right track.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 23:20:23
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 9, 8:55 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> > > Amphetamines are handed out free to soldiers, carnival
> > > workers, military pilots, and many others.
>
> > If they're being handed out to carnival workers there's a felony
> > waiting to be prosecuted since amphetamines are a Schedule II drug
> > available only by prescription. I don't think the carnival ringmaster
> > is an MD prescribing Adderal to carny trash. (Another problem with the
> > "let them dope" crowd is that this necessarily involves giving bike
> > racers a pass on obeying the drug laws. Felony free drugs if only you
> > can get picked up by a team!)
>
> You are naive or willfully ignorant.

About what, exactly? I don't doubt that people use illegal drugs like
amphetamines, crack, and meth. But if they're being handed out to
carny workers in the cotton candy, it's a felony, and one richly
deserving of prosecution since I don't fancy some hillbilly with
dialated pupils and no sleep since September running the tilt-a-whirl.
I don't think IBM has a bin full of Adderall, meth, and crack next to
the coffee pot in the break room, either.

> > A cup of coffee vs. a pharmacological wonderland of roids, HGH, EPO,
> > amphetamines, hormones: not in the same ballpark, not in the same
> > league, not even the same sport.
>
> Now we are only negotiating terms. Everybody is under pressure
> to take performance enhancing drugs.

A cup of coffee to to keep you awake in another interminable
powerpoint presentation from a vendor is not quite the same thing as a
requiring a crack habit as a condition of employment. The comparison
isn't a negotiation, it's stupidity on stilts.

Date: 10 Jul 2007 22:16:02
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<1184048423.245000.15640@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com >,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

> On Jul 9, 8:55 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > > Amphetamines are handed out free to soldiers, carnival
> > > > workers, military pilots, and many others.
> >
> > > If they're being handed out to carnival workers there's a felony
> > > waiting to be prosecuted since amphetamines are a Schedule II drug
> > > available only by prescription. I don't think the carnival ringmaster
> > > is an MD prescribing Adderal to carny trash. (Another problem with the
> > > "let them dope" crowd is that this necessarily involves giving bike
> > > racers a pass on obeying the drug laws. Felony free drugs if only you
> > > can get picked up by a team!)
> >
> > You are naive or willfully ignorant.
>
> About what, exactly? I don't doubt that people use illegal drugs like
> amphetamines, crack, and meth. But if they're being handed out to
> carny workers in the cotton candy, it's a felony, and one richly
> deserving of prosecution since I don't fancy some hillbilly with
> dialated pupils and no sleep since September running the tilt-a-whirl.
> I don't think IBM has a bin full of Adderall, meth, and crack next to
> the coffee pot in the break room, either.

You can't always get what you want.

> > > A cup of coffee vs. a pharmacological wonderland of roids, HGH, EPO,
> > > amphetamines, hormones: not in the same ballpark, not in the same
> > > league, not even the same sport.
> >
> > Now we are only negotiating terms. Everybody is under pressure
> > to take performance enhancing drugs.
>
> A cup of coffee to to keep you awake in another interminable
> powerpoint presentation from a vendor is not quite the same thing as a
> requiring a crack habit as a condition of employment. The comparison
> isn't a negotiation, it's stupidity on stilts.

Analgesics, soporifics, anti-histamines, anti-inflammatories,
diuretics, binders, looseners, mood-elevators, diet pills, ...

Are you blind, or is this omerta?

--
Michael Press

Date: 09 Jul 2007 16:29:03
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 9, 4:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> > Employers are handing out illegal scrips for painkillers, roids, and
> > smack and directing employees to take the drugs?
>
> Amphetamines are handed out free to soldiers, carnival
> workers, military pilots, and many others.

If they're being handed out to carnival workers there's a felony
waiting to be prosecuted since amphetamines are a Schedule II drug
available only by prescription. I don't think the carnival ringmaster
is an MD prescribing Adderal to carny trash. (Another problem with the
"let them dope" crowd is that this necessarily involves giving bike
racers a pass on obeying the drug laws. Felony free drugs if only you
can get picked up by a team!)

Pilots and the like are occassionaly given stimulants because they are
in life or death situations, and as much as I like bike racing, I
won't die if there's no tour. People might die if a pilot isn't alert
enough to provide close air support or falls asleep while flying.

> > Applying indirect pressure to come into work with the sniffles
> > is not quite the same thing as injecting EPO or taking HGH
> > as a condition of employment.
>
> Are you negotiating? because you lost the real dispute.

A cup of coffee vs. a pharmacological wonderland of roids, HGH, EPO,
amphetamines, hormones: not in the same ballpark, not in the same
league, not even the same sport.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 20:55:33
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<1184023743.190981.166560@e9g2000prf.googlegroups.com >,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

> On Jul 9, 4:02 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > Employers are handing out illegal scrips for painkillers, roids, and
> > > smack and directing employees to take the drugs?
> >
> > Amphetamines are handed out free to soldiers, carnival
> > workers, military pilots, and many others.
>
> If they're being handed out to carnival workers there's a felony
> waiting to be prosecuted since amphetamines are a Schedule II drug
> available only by prescription. I don't think the carnival ringmaster
> is an MD prescribing Adderal to carny trash. (Another problem with the
> "let them dope" crowd is that this necessarily involves giving bike
> racers a pass on obeying the drug laws. Felony free drugs if only you
> can get picked up by a team!)

You are naive or willfully ignorant.

> Pilots and the like are occassionaly given stimulants because they are
> in life or death situations, and as much as I like bike racing, I
> won't die if there's no tour. People might die if a pilot isn't alert
> enough to provide close air support or falls asleep while flying.
>
> > > Applying indirect pressure to come into work with the sniffles
> > > is not quite the same thing as injecting EPO or taking HGH
> > > as a condition of employment.
> >
> > Are you negotiating? because you lost the real dispute.
>
> A cup of coffee vs. a pharmacological wonderland of roids, HGH, EPO,
> amphetamines, hormones: not in the same ballpark, not in the same
> league, not even the same sport.

Now we are only negotiating terms. Everybody is under pressure
to take performance enhancing drugs.

--
Michael Press

Date: 09 Jul 2007 14:36:21
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 9, 1:23 am, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr > wrote:
> > Does your employer tell you to take roids or else get fired?
>
> Lots of employers expect ill employees to work, whether it be flu, broken
> limbs in casts, a whole variety of illnesses. And they expect that employee
> to take _any_ medication that will bring them to work, regardless of
> negative health impact.

Employers are handing out illegal scrips for painkillers, roids, and
smack and directing employees to take the drugs?

Applying indirect pressure to come into work with the sniffles
is not quite the same thing as injecting EPO or taking HGH
as a condition of employment.

>Else, why would they track sick days so carefully?

So slackers don't take 250 days a year of sick leave.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 16:02:05
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<1184016981.693780.304130@o11g2000prd.googlegroups.com >
,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

> On Jul 9, 1:23 am, "Sandy" <leu...@frree.fr> wrote:
> > > Does your employer tell you to take roids or else get fired?
> >
> > Lots of employers expect ill employees to work, whether it be flu, broken
> > limbs in casts, a whole variety of illnesses. And they expect that employee
> > to take _any_ medication that will bring them to work, regardless of
> > negative health impact.
>
> Employers are handing out illegal scrips for painkillers, roids, and
> smack and directing employees to take the drugs?

Amphetamines are handed out free to soldiers, carnival
workers, military pilots, and many others. How do those
elite military corps build up all that muscle? Office
and factory first aid cabinets are stuffed with
medication for pain and flu symptomes. Once was, maybe
still is, a coffee house on the interstate highway in
New Jersey. One cuppa joe, and you were set up for the night.

> Applying indirect pressure to come into work with the sniffles
> is not quite the same thing as injecting EPO or taking HGH
> as a condition of employment.

Are you negotiating? because you lost the real dispute.

> >Else, why would they track sick days so carefully?
>
> So slackers don't take 250 days a year of sick leave.

You are reaching now.

--
Michael Press

Date: 09 Jul 2007 13:44:33
From: SLAVE of THE STATE
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Date: 09 Jul 2007 19:51:54
From: Howard Kveck
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article <1184013873.992255.26010@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com >,
SLAVE of THE STATE <gwhite@ti.com > wrote:

> On Jul 8, 9:11 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org>
> wrote:
> > On Jul 8, 7:42 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > The proposal is intended to incentivize
> >
> > Aaah!! Aaah! My eyes!!!
> >
> > I think there ought to be lifetime bans for using the word
> > "incentivize." Do you speak in PowerPoint?
>
> http://www.bullshitbingo.net/cards/bullshit/
>
> I didn't see it with the first few clicks.
>
>
> Customize for rbr:
>
> http://www.shanemcdonald.com/laughs/l-make-your-bullshit-bingo.html
>
> I think dumbass should be disallowed.

Have you seen this, Greg?

http://www.dack.com/web/bullshit.html

--
tanx,
Howard

Never take a tenant with a monkey.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Date: 09 Jul 2007 11:39:24
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 9, 2:53 am, Simon Brooke
> years of house arrest. The commanding officers - who had been hovering
> above all day in helicopters, watching what was going on - were not
> sanctioned at all.

Fourteen officers were indicted.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 04:33:38
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 9:03 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 8:46 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> > > position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> > > ship aground,
>
> > <snip>
>
> > Jackass -
>
> > That's because it's the captain's job to steer the ship. The
> > underlings are doing his job.
>
> The captain's job is to make sure the entire ship is ready for sea and
> combat, including the crew and equipment. If he fails in any part of
> that, including not training his subordinates, and his subordinates
> exercise their personal responsiblity to fuck up, the captain is still
> responsible because he put a dumbass on deck.
>
> > As for drugs - that's the rider's job, not the DS's.
>
> The evidence so far is that it IS the DS's job. He's the one
> organizing the blood bag deliveries, the EPO vials, and hiring the
> doper docs (and firing the docs who refuse to go along with doping).

Dumbass -

There may be some instances where that is the case, but in the rule is
that the DSs won't expose themselves in that manner. Organizing
distribution in that manner is an invitation to criminal charges by
certain governments. That threat carries much more weight than any UCI
sanction.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 23:49:22
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 10:55 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net > wrote:
> > How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to take
> > drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate death?
>
> How about the tens of millions of people damaging their
> health taking over-the-counter and prescription drugs,

Does your employer tell you to take roids or else get fired?

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:23:31
From: Sandy
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Dans le message de
news:1183963762.593480.299830@g37g2000prf.googlegroups.com,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > a r�fl�chi, et puis a d�clar� :
> On Jul 8, 10:55 pm, Michael Press <rub...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>>> How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to
>>> take drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate
>>> death?
>>
>> How about the tens of millions of people damaging their
>> health taking over-the-counter and prescription drugs,
>
> Does your employer tell you to take roids or else get fired?

Lots of employers expect ill employees to work, whether it be flu, broken
limbs in casts, a whole variety of illnesses. And they expect that employee
to take _any_ medication that will bring them to work, regardless of
negative health impact. Else, why would they track sick days so carefully?
It is all a measure to achieve the corporate profit goals.
--
Sandy
--
Il n'est aucune sorte de sensation qui soit plus vive
que celle de la douleur ; ses impressions sont s�res,
elles ne trompent point comme celles du plaisir.
- de Sade.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 23:42:33
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 11:34 pm, Davey Crockett <d4Qaveycrock...@azurservers.com >
wrote:
> > In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> > position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> > ship aground, he's still held responsible and will almost certainly
> > face a court martial.
>
> "If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, "the law is a ass"
> Charles Dickens Collection

The rule was developed for a simple reason: to incentivize the captain
to make sure his subordinates attend to their duties. It works.
Captains are granted demigod-like power, and are held accountable for
whatever happens. They see to it that duties are zealously attended to
because their ass is on the line, and they can't pass the buck.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 21:55:05
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 9:11 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> On Jul 8, 7:42 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The proposal is intended to incentivize
>
> Aaah!! Aaah! My eyes!!!
>
> I think there ought to be lifetime bans for using the word
> "incentivize." Do you speak in PowerPoint?

Synergy.

> A DS can ask riders not to dope, but how is he going to
> prove it against them without, say, longitudinal blood
> sampling?

If that's what the DS thinks to takes to keep his job safe. Why
would you think that tests like that are the exclusive domain
of the anti-doping agencies? It would seem to me to be part
of his _duty_ to keep a drug-free squad.

> > What makes you think you can catch people more frequently? You think
> > the teams would suddenly get sloppy about omerta if only the penalties
> > were lower? This is just wishful thinking, postulating something that
> > isn't going to happen and then claiming the problem is contained.
>
> I addressed this. They could free up money and time by reducing
> the incentive to fight cases in court.

The problem isn't fighting them in court. It's getting them caught in
the first place. The dopers are clever enough to avoid most of the
drug tests. Faster processing of busted dopers isn't going to result
in more positive tests to feed the punishment end of the equation. The
basic issue is that dopers are better at hiding it than the governing
groups are at finding it. So the solution is to deputize the DS's and
hold them accountable, because they have a far better idea of what is
going on on their teams than the WADA.

> Right
> now no-one wants to say or admit anything because they expose
> themselves or others to excessively harsh penalties.

The omerta is long-standing, going back decades, even when the
penalties weren't as harsh. Back in the 70's riders were penalized on
time in the tour for drugs infractions; it didn't seem to have any
effect on omerta or the prevalance of drugs. Zoetemelk was postive in
the 1977 tour and finished 8th after being penalized 10 minutes. I
don't think anyone would call the 70's some kind of drug-free era in
cycling, or say that the problem was under control then, or that a
greater percentage of doping riders got caught.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 04:11:12
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 7:42 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:

> The proposal is intended to incentivize

Aaah!! Aaah! My eyes!!!

I think there ought to be lifetime bans for using the word
"incentivize." Do you speak in PowerPoint?

A DS can ask riders not to dope, but how is he going to
prove it against them without, say, longitudinal blood
sampling? If you want that, require the anti-doping agency
to do it.

> > The criminologists find that severity of a penalty does not
> > really deter crime. Increasing the likelihood that you'll get
> > caught does.
>
> What makes you think you can catch people more frequently? You think
> the teams would suddenly get sloppy about omerta if only the penalties
> were lower? This is just wishful thinking, postulating something that
> isn't going to happen and then claiming the problem is contained.

I addressed this. They could free up money and time by reducing
the incentive to fight cases in court. Also, yes, if the penalty for
getting
caught is smaller, there will be less of a motive for omerta. Right
now no-one wants to say or admit anything because they expose
themselves or others to excessively harsh penalties. If the
guy in the next cubicle is behaving mildly unethically, would your
willingness to complain about it depend on whether he was going
to get a reprimand, or get fired? It would for me.

> There's no legal right to hold a UCI Director Sportif license. The UCI
> can write or rewrite their rulebook any way the damn well please and
> eject DS's on whatever grounds they like, including "looks like some
> kind of prevert".

I think that you are underestimating European labor law
(including the question of whether the UCI can impose
Common-Market-wide sanctions), but ask Sandy for
clarification. And discriminating in employment on the
grounds of "looks like some kind of prevert" isn't legal
even under US law.

Ben
I discriminate based on use of the word "incentivize"

Date: 08 Jul 2007 21:03:26
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 8:46 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> > position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> > ship aground,
>
> <snip>
>
> Jackass -
>
> That's because it's the captain's job to steer the ship. The
> underlings are doing his job.

The captain's job is to make sure the entire ship is ready for sea and
combat, including the crew and equipment. If he fails in any part of
that, including not training his subordinates, and his subordinates
exercise their personal responsiblity to fuck up, the captain is still
responsible because he put a dumbass on deck.

> As for drugs - that's the rider's job, not the DS's.

The evidence so far is that it IS the DS's job. He's the one
organizing the blood bag deliveries, the EPO vials, and hiring the
doper docs (and firing the docs who refuse to go along with doping).

Date: 08 Jul 2007 20:46:54
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 7:56 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 6:55 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
> > the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
> > that the offending soldier receives.
>
> In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> ship aground,

<snip >

Jackass -

That's because it's the captain's job to steer the ship. The
underlings are doing his job.

As for drugs - that's the rider's job, not the DS's. If one of the
riders gets caught drunk driving, should the DS go to jail? There's
this thing called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY that blowhards like you
enjoy spouting off about, that is, until a situation arises where
taking PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY doesn't suit you.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 20:46:07
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 6:57 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> They don't have to do any of that. No one forces them to be bike
> racers. It is a profession they all choose. Like any other profession,
> there are pros and cons to the job.

Nobody forces Godefroot or Bruyneel to be in bike racing. It's a
profession they all choose. Like any other profession, there are pros
and cons to the job. Under my proposal, one of the cons would be being
banned for life if one of their riders doped. That's a less severe
problem that being killed or crippled by the dope DS's give to their
riders.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 19:56:55
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 6:55 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
> the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
> that the offending soldier receives.

In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
ship aground, he's still held responsible and will almost certainly
face a court martial. Because he's the captain, and is responsible for
EVERYTHING that happens on the ship. Likewise, the CO of a unit that
committed atrocities is likely to face charges as well. The Army wound
up court-martialing the officer in charge of the interrogation center,
and the general in charge of the prison was found to be engaging in
derilection of duty, even though she claimed to have no knowledge of
the abuse.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:53:14
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

in message <1183949815.021576.216240@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com >, Ernst
Blofeld ('blofeld42@hotmail.com') wrote:

> On Jul 8, 6:55 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
>> the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
>> that the offending soldier receives.
>
> In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> ship aground, he's still held responsible and will almost certainly
> face a court martial. Because he's the captain, and is responsible for
> EVERYTHING that happens on the ship. Likewise, the CO of a unit that
> committed atrocities is likely to face charges as well.

My Lai.

Just one person - a sergeant who witnesses testified to seeing machine gun
unarmed civilians - was tried for this; he was convicted and given a life
sentence, of which he served exactly one day in prison, and a further 3.5
years of house arrest. The commanding officers - who had been hovering
above all day in helicopters, watching what was going on - were not
sanctioned at all.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I put the 'sexy' in 'dyslexia'

Date: 09 Jul 2007 08:34:16
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > writes:

> On Jul 8, 6:55 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
>> the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
>> that the offending soldier receives.
>
> In fact, if the captain of a ship (which is roughly analogous to a DS
> position) is sleeping in his cabin and one of his underlings runs the
> ship aground, he's still held responsible and will almost certainly
> face a court martial. Because he's the captain, and is responsible for
> EVERYTHING that happens on the ship. Likewise, the CO of a unit that
> committed atrocities is likely to face charges as well. The Army wound
> up court-martialing the officer in charge of the interrogation center,
> and the general in charge of the prison was found to be engaging in
> derilection of duty, even though she claimed to have no knowledge of
> the abuse.
>
"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, "the law is a ass"
Charles Dickens Collection

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
"If the American people knew what we have done, they would string us up from the lamp posts."
George H.W. Bush

Date: 08 Jul 2007 19:44:25
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 6:57 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to take
> > drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate death?
>
> Dumbass -
>
> They don't have to do any of that. No one forces them to be bike
> racers. It is a profession they all choose. Like any other profession,
> there are pros and cons to the job.

...And we're back to gladitorial contests. Hey, the gladiators signed
up, right? So shut up and bet on the guy with the net and trident.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 19:42:12
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 7:02 pm, "b...@mambo.ucolick.org" <b...@mambo.ucolick.org >
wrote:
> Your proposal addresses the usual issue with doping bans,
> which is that riders dope not because of a lust for fame and
> glory (mostly) but because they need to produce results for
> the team, sponsor etc. However, it remains stupid and
> unworkable. Stepping aside from the moral issues surrounding
> banning Person A for the actions of Person B when you
> can't prove A knew what B was doing, it wouldn't work.

The proposal is intended to incentivize Person A to make damn sure
Person B is not doping. Since Person A has enormous power over Person
B, this might well work. As it stands now, Person A is encouraging
Person B to dope, reaping the benefits of doping, and is not being
held accountable for this. Surprise--the teams are still facilitating
doping. Who'd a thunk it?

> The criminologists find that severity of a penalty does not
> really deter crime. Increasing the likelihood that you'll get
> caught does.

What makes you think you can catch people more frequently? You think
the teams would suddenly get sloppy about omerta if only the penalties
were lower? This is just wishful thinking, postulating something that
isn't going to happen and then claiming the problem is contained.

> every lifetime
> doping ban would be tied up in the courts for years. The
> WADA/UCI have been moving towards longer penalties for
> a while and it isn't helping.

There's no legal right to hold a UCI Director Sportif license. The UCI
can write or rewrite their rulebook any way the damn well please and
eject DS's on whatever grounds they like, including "looks like some
kind of prevert".

Date: 09 Jul 2007 02:02:11
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 4:20 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
>
> What on earth are you going on about? My proposal to ban the DS of a
> team in which a rider has been shown to be on drugs is Old Testament
> in its severity. It's a simple rule, and if you fall afoul if it
> you're out of pro cycling for life. It's about as cuddly as razor
> wire, and it's made necessary because the teams have been encouraging
> their riders to take drugs and covering it all up.
>
> When I said cycling can get along without Godefroote et al I meant
> exactly that. They can be replaced. They don't have a right to be a
> DS, and there are dozens of others that can do the job without doping
> the riders.

Dumbass,

Your proposal addresses the usual issue with doping bans,
which is that riders dope not because of a lust for fame and
glory (mostly) but because they need to produce results for
the team, sponsor etc. However, it remains stupid and
unworkable. Stepping aside from the moral issues surrounding
banning Person A for the actions of Person B when you
can't prove A knew what B was doing, it wouldn't work.

Bart van Hoorebeeck was the first person to point out in RBR
that criminologists actually spend time studying what deters
crime (or in this case doping, which is not a criminal violation
unless you are Jan Ullrich and draw the attention of a busybody).
The criminologists find that severity of a penalty does not
really deter crime. Increasing the likelihood that you'll get
caught does. As an extreme example, in Sharia law countries,
people still steal and commit adultery.

Many of us think that some level of doping is widespread, yet
few people get caught. Presumably the dopers know that too,
and would continue to play the odds. Additionally, if it meant
loss of livelihood for a team's worth of people, every lifetime
doping ban would be tied up in the courts for years. The
WADA/UCI have been moving towards longer penalties for
a while and it isn't helping. We need more, smaller penalties,
and they have to be uniformly enforced, not so dependent
on different countries' appeal boards.

Chung's idea that doping violations are sporting rules violations
and should be punished with sporting penalties (time penalties,
DQ from race, etc) is also good. Make the penalties smaller, cut
down on the legal bills, and spend the money on out of competition
testing instead.

But none of this sounds like "getting tough on dopers" or impresses
people with your hang 'em high attitude, and it certainly won't
happen under the current delusonairies at WADA.

Ben

Date: 08 Jul 2007 18:57:57
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 4:04 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 1:32 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com>
> wrote:
>
> > >Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> > >rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> > >Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> > Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> > to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> > Won't someone please think of the children?
>
> How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to take
> drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate death?

Dumbass -

They don't have to do any of that. No one forces them to be bike
racers. It is a profession they all choose. Like any other profession,
there are pros and cons to the job.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 18:55:52
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 4:20 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 3:49 pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > > No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
> > > but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
> > > can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.
>
> What on earth are you going on about? My proposal to ban the DS of a
> team in which a rider has been shown to be on drugs is Old Testament
> in its severity.

Fucktard -

I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
that the offending soldier receives. They're all under his command, he
should be held responsible.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 08:29:49
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Kurgan Gringioni <kgringioni@hotmail.com > writes:

> On Jul 8, 4:20 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Jul 8, 3:49 pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>> > > No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
>> > > but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
>> > > can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.
>>
>> What on earth are you going on about? My proposal to ban the DS of a
>> team in which a rider has been shown to be on drugs is Old Testament
>> in its severity.
>
>
>
>
> Fucktard -
>
>
> I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
> the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
> that the offending soldier receives. They're all under his command, he
> should be held responsible.
>
>

He'd plead Insanity and not even get an objection from the Prosecution

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
“To see and not speak out would be a great betrayal. It is as if
watching my nation busily engaged in heaping its own funeral pyre. I
am filled with foreboding, for like the Roman I seem to see the River
Tiber foaming with much blood.”
Enoch Powell

Date: 09 Jul 2007 03:34:42
From: Tom Kunich
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

"Kurgan Gringioni" <kgringioni@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:1183946152.835920.27340@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
>
> I propose that if any of our soldiers commit atrocities in Iraq then
> the Commander in Chief (the President) be held to the same punishment
> that the offending soldier receives. They're all under his command, he
> should be held responsible.

And since you're the one who is part of the electorate I say that anything
that occurs to the commander in chief, happens to you in spades.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 01:45:56
From: bjw@mambo.ucolick.org
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 1:32 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:05:36 -0700, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> >rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> >Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> Won't someone please think of the children?

Wouldn't it be simpler to just let the riders ride and
ban the children?

Ben
RBR Family Counseling Division

Date: 08 Jul 2007 16:27:20
From: dustoyevsky@mac.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 2:05 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> On Jul 8, 8:06 am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > Go after the administrators with "death threat" suspensions and
> > automatic fines of a year's salary, and see how quick this mess gets
> > cleaned up.
>
> Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.

Not the administrators I was thinking of. And not the ones _I'd_ like
to see punished, punished, punished. And punished some more.

Link to story "Marion Jones bankrupt":

p://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-marion23jun23,1,860021.story?ctrack=2&cset=true

How do you go bankrupt when you haven't been found guilty? Bad, bad
administrators, that's how!

If the counter is "they knew she was doping" or "it was obvious", blah
blah blah, I have to ask which of your rights you'd give up when they
come for you. --D-y

Date: 08 Jul 2007 16:20:03
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 3:49 pm, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net > wrote:
> > No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
> > but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
> > can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.

What on earth are you going on about? My proposal to ban the DS of a
team in which a rider has been shown to be on drugs is Old Testament
in its severity. It's a simple rule, and if you fall afoul if it
you're out of pro cycling for life. It's about as cuddly as razor
wire, and it's made necessary because the teams have been encouraging
their riders to take drugs and covering it all up.

When I said cycling can get along without Godefroote et al I meant
exactly that. They can be replaced. They don't have a right to be a
DS, and there are dozens of others that can do the job without doping
the riders.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 16:04:51
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 1:32 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> >Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> >rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> >Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> Won't someone please think of the children?

How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to take
drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate death?

Perhaps we could have a black team jersey for the first team to have a
rider killed by illegal drugs. Call it the Tom Simpson Memorial
Jersey. Then we can give the riders nets and tridents and turn it into
a gladitorial contest.

Godefroot et al don't give a damn about the riders. They'll happily
dope them to the gills if it means a couple more Pro Tour wins, and if
the riders wind up dead or crippled, oh well.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 22:55:16
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<1183935891.988619.203100@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com >
,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

> On Jul 8, 1:32 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com>
> wrote:
> > >Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> > >rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> > >Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
> >
> > Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> > to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> > Won't someone please think of the children?
>
> How about the riders who are forced by the system they ride in to take
> drugs that may well cause long-term health issues or immediate death?

How about the tens of millions of people damaging their
health taking over-the-counter and prescription drugs,
drugs with side effect lists a mile long. Just because
someone does not suffer one of the side effects does
not mean the drug is not putting a burden on the
physiology. The pressure is great in the civilian
world to take drugs. Then there are the interactions
of the over the counter medications. Do not drink
alcohol if you take acetaminophen, lest you suffer
irreparable liver damage. I ask you? Do not drink
alcohol?

--
Michael Press

Date: 08 Jul 2007 15:49:14
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 6:17 pm, John Forrest Tomlinson <usenetrem...@jt10000.com >
wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 15:00:09 -0700, Bill C <tritonri...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On Jul 8, 5:56 pm, "benjo maso" <benjo.m...@chello.nl> wrote:
> >> "Donald Munro" <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>
> >> > Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> >> >>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> >> >>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> >> >>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> >> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> >> >> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> >> >> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> >> >> Won't someone please think of the children?
>
> >> > Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
> >> > solution ?
>
> >> It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
> >> changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
> >> step in the right direction.
>
> >> Benjo
>
> >You hit your head? You sound like a liberal American parent where
> >they've stopped keeping score in sports due to the protests.
> >PS
> >I know you are being sarcastic. You're rational.
> >Bill C
>
> No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
> but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
> can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.
>
> --
> JT
> ****************************
> Remove "remove" to reply
> Visithttp://www.jt10000.com
> ****************************- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

JT
It really seems to me to have come out of the "Self Esteem" is the
most important thing movement, and I haven't seen many conservatives
involved with that. Goes along well with "social promotion" in our
schools too.
Bill C
You may have a better view than I do though.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 15:00:09
From: Bill C
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 5:56 pm, "benjo maso" <benjo.m...@chello.nl > wrote:
> "Donald Munro" <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>
> > Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> >>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
> >>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
> >>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> >> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> >> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> >> Won't someone please think of the children?
>
> > Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
> > solution ?
>
> It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
> changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
> step in the right direction.
>
> Benjo

You hit your head? You sound like a liberal American parent where
they've stopped keeping score in sports due to the protests.
PS
I know you are being sarcastic. You're rational.
Bill C

Date: 09 Jul 2007 00:35:36
From: benjo maso
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

"Bill C" <tritonrider@verizon.net > wrote in message
news:1183932009.952205.152220@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 8, 5:56 pm, "benjo maso" <benjo.m...@chello.nl> wrote:
>> "Donald Munro" <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>>
>> > Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>> >>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>> >>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>> >>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>>
>> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> >> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
>> >> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
>> >> Won't someone please think of the children?
>>
>> > Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
>> > solution ?
>>
>> It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must
>> be
>> changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an
>> important
>> step in the right direction.
>>
>> Benjo
>
> You hit your head? You sound like a liberal American parent where
> they've stopped keeping score in sports due to the protests.
> PS
> I know you are being sarcastic. You're rational.

I should have known better than suggesting such a thing - one never knows.
After Paris-Roubaix 1987 there was a small scandal because every TV viewer
could have seen how the three riders in the lead, Erik Vanderaerden, Patrick
Versluys and Rudy Dhaenens, were involved in a long discussion about ...
whatever. The day after I wrote in a newspaper that perhaps the UCI should
impose a ban on public speaking at the last 10 Km. ATo my horror

Date: 09 Jul 2007 00:43:35
From: benjo maso
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

"benjo maso" <benjo.maso@chello.nl > wrote in message
news:5fd75lF3c8gs1U1@mid.individual.net...

I'm sorry, I sent my message to early. What I meant to say was:

I should have known better than suggesting such a thing - one never knows.
After Paris-Roubaix 1987 there was a small scandal because every TV viewer
could have seen how the three riders in the lead, Erik Vanderaerden, Patrick
Versluys and Rudy Dhaenens, were involved in a long discussion about ...
whatever. The day after I wrote in a newspaper that perhaps the UCI should
impose a ban on public speaking at the last 10 Km. To my horror I heard a
few month later that the authorities of the UCI had seriuosly discussed my
"suggestion" - they hadn't understood it was just a joke! I hope thins won't
repeat themselves...

Benjo

Date: 08 Jul 2007 18:17:03
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 15:00:09 -0700, Bill C <tritonrider@verizon.net >
wrote:

>On Jul 8, 5:56 pm, "benjo maso" <benjo.m...@chello.nl> wrote:
>> "Donald Munro" <fat-dumb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>>
>> > Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>> >>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>> >>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>> >>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>>
>> > John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> >> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
>> >> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
>> >> Won't someone please think of the children?
>>
>> > Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
>> > solution ?
>>
>> It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
>> changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
>> step in the right direction.
>>
>> Benjo
>
>You hit your head? You sound like a liberal American parent where
>they've stopped keeping score in sports due to the protests.
>PS
>I know you are being sarcastic. You're rational.
>Bill C

No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Date: 08 Jul 2007 21:17:39
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 18:17:03 -0400, John Forrest Tomlinson
<usenetremove@jt10000.com > wrote:

>No, the stereotypical parent (and I don't think it's a liberal thing,
>but an overindulgent one) is that there should not be any losers --
>can't everyone be a winner. Similar but not exactly the same.

The Mr. Rogers syndrome.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 12:05:36
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 8, 8:06 am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com > wrote:
> Go after the administrators with "death threat" suspensions and
> automatic fines of a year's salary, and see how quick this mess gets
> cleaned up.

Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 16:32:00
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 12:05:36 -0700, Ernst Blofeld
<blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

>On Jul 8, 8:06 am, "dustoyev...@mac.com" <dustoyev...@mac.com> wrote:
>> Go after the administrators with "death threat" suspensions and
>> automatic fines of a year's salary, and see how quick this mess gets
>> cleaned up.
>
>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
Won't someone please think of the children?

--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Date: 08 Jul 2007 23:36:17
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
> Won't someone please think of the children?

Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
solution ?

Date: 08 Jul 2007 23:56:14
From: benjo maso
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
> Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>
> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
>> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
>> Won't someone please think of the children?
>
> Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
> solution ?

It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
step in the right direction.

Benjo

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:22:14
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

benjo maso wrote:
> It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
> changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
> step in the right direction.

Perhaps we could give all the prize money and kudos to the Lanterne Rouge.
That way we would at least know who has the best track stand.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 18:16:12
From: John Forrest Tomlinson
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Sun, 8 Jul 2007 23:56:14 +0200, "benjo maso" <benjo.maso@chello.nl >
wrote:

>
>"Donald Munro" <fat-dumbass@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:4691591d$0$5577$ec3e2dad@news.usenetmonster.com...
>> Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>>>>Oh, yes. I'd ban for life the DS and all the soigneurs if any team
>>>>rider popped positive. Cycling can get along quite nicely without
>>>>Riis, Godefroot, and Bruyneel.
>>
>> John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>>> Ban their fans too. And family. And the sponsor as well. We've got
>>> to nip doping in the bud and do whatever it takes, for the children.
>>> Won't someone please think of the children?
>>
>> Why stop at banning them. Can't we arrange for a more permanent final
>> solution ?
>
>It's so simple. Because riders are taking doping to win, the rules must be
>changed so there will be no winners anymore. The Tour 2006 is an important
>step in the right direction.

Got it. Instead of one winner and 150 losers in a race, it's all
losers. Elegant solution.
--
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

Date: 08 Jul 2007 08:15:59
From: dustoyevsky@mac.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 7, 7:43 pm, Kurgan Gringioni <kgringi...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> And therein lies the problem.
>
> People don't want to read about doping soap operas.
>
> Doping is a fundamental part of modern life in the industrialized
> world. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, ritalin, viagra, aspirin,
> marijuana, ibuprofen, ex-lax, immodium, ny-quil, birth control pills
> (hormones), valium, xanax, prozac, xoloft, the list goes on and on and
> on . . .
>
> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
> demonizing them. The fans. The fans use as many drugs as the riders.
> It's part of life in the Western World. That list in the last
> paragraph? We all have friends and family who have used, are using,
> every single one of them.

Some, as above. Some, who take Ibu when it hurts, or "abuse" (aka,
imbibe a quantity sufficient to feel effect) legal and/or illegal
substances, recognize the situation for what it is, and "don't care"
about "doping".

(repeating, and I haven't re-found this quote yet): Someone once said
something to the effect that, speaking of the plight(s) of Lester
Young and Billie Holliday, "We demand superhuman performances from our
idols, and damn them for using the substances that enable them to
produce those performances". Or something like that, close enough.

I love the irony of making sport pure for corporate advertising.

I love the irony of making the society pure for corporate employers.

It's the War on People. And the People are too cowed to fight back.
--D-y

Date: 08 Jul 2007 18:13:28
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

in message <1183907759.335079.221640@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com >,
dustoyevsky@mac.com ('dustoyevsky@mac.com') wrote:

>> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
>> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
>> demonizing them.

This is complete, utter bollocks. Today, a British driver was in pole
position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
Hove. So what were well over a million people - two percent of the whole
population of Britain - doing?

Standing on the roadside watching a bike race.

What other sporting event could pull two percent of the whole population?
A tiny, if vocal, minority are 'repulsed by doping'. The overwhelming
majority are not bothered.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Age equals angst multiplied by the speed of fright squared.
;; the Worlock

Date: 09 Jul 2007 09:27:37
From: Ewoud Dronkert
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Simon Brooke schreef:
> Today, a British driver was in pole
> position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
> in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
> final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
> Hove.

And there was the Regatta in Henley-on-Thames! Not a peep on the Beeb,
damn shame.

--
E. Dronkert

Date: 09 Jul 2007 09:49:25
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ewoud Dronkert <firstname@lastname.net.invalid > writes:

> Simon Brooke schreef:
>> Today, a British driver was in pole
>> position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
>> in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
>> final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
>> Hove.
>
> And there was the Regatta in Henley-on-Thames! Not a peep on the Beeb,
> damn shame.

The Politically Correct BBC

http://azurservers.com/rbr/blind-bbc.jpg

were off covering the violence which erupted in Sedgewick as the
Lib-Dems, Conservatives and Labour came to Physical Violence in the
Campaign for Tony Bliar's vacated seat

They may haved covered the Skirmishing, but they certainly won't
publish it.

You see, like all other major news sources, the BBC is not independent
and fails to report anything that might harm the Labour Party, or the
convicted Paedophiles at SearchLight (SearchLies??) to whom Tony Bliar's
government illegally gave 400,000 GBP of Taxpayer Money to spread Lies
about its Political Opponents

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
The best slaves are the ones that think they're free.
Right George?

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:04:45
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Davey Crockett <d4Qaveycrockett@azurservers.com > writes:

> Ewoud Dronkert <firstname@lastname.net.invalid> writes:
>
>> Simon Brooke schreef:
>>> Today, a British driver was in pole
>>> position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
>>> in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
>>> final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
>>> Hove.
>>
>> And there was the Regatta in Henley-on-Thames! Not a peep on the Beeb,
>> damn shame.
>
> The Politically Correct BBC
>
> http://azurservers.com/rbr/blind-bbc.jpg
>
> were off covering the violence which erupted in Sedgewick as the
> Lib-Dems, Conservatives and Labour came to Physical Violence in the
> Campaign for Tony Bliar's vacated seat
>
> They may haved covered the Skirmishing, but they certainly won't
> publish it.
>

They are as has been remarked "CockRoaches"

See Mark Collett's "Cockroaches Speech"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojn2o2Ei1mg

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
BBC Finally admits it
Al Quaeda == Al-CIA-da
http://mathaba.net/rss/?x=556855

Date: 08 Jul 2007 21:12:50
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 18:13:28 +0100, Simon Brooke
<simon@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:

>>> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
>>> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
>>> demonizing them.
>
>This is complete, utter bollocks. Today, a British driver was in pole
>position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
>in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
>final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
>Hove. So what were well over a million people - two percent of the whole
>population of Britain - doing?
>
>Standing on the roadside watching a bike race.

I assume that most of them were locals who came out to watch the bike
racers go by and then go home to catch up on the cricket, GP and
tennis on their Tivos.

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:35:09
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

in message <do23931nqmaoi1tp0eea06cahb0m84t2ql@4ax.com >, Jack Hollis
('xsleeper@aol.com') wrote:

> On Sun, 08 Jul 2007 18:13:28 +0100, Simon Brooke
> <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>>> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
>>>> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
>>>> demonizing them.
>>
>>This is complete, utter bollocks. Today, a British driver was in pole
>>position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
>>in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
>>final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket
>>in Hove. So what were well over a million people - two percent of the
>>whole population of Britain - doing?
>>
>>Standing on the roadside watching a bike race.
>
> I assume that most of them were locals who came out to watch the bike
> racers go by and then go home to catch up on the cricket, GP and
> tennis on their Tivos.

The entire population of Kent is 1,621,000. So if you are right, about 125%
of the local population were standing at the roadside, which has to be
some sort of record.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

...but have you *seen* the size of the world wide spider?

Date: 10 Jul 2007 12:03:08
From: MJ Ray
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:
> Jack Hollis ('xsleeper@aol.com') wrote:
> > I assume that most of them were locals who came out to watch the bike
> > racers go by and then go home to catch up on the cricket, GP and
> > tennis on their Tivos.
>
> The entire population of Kent is 1,621,000. So if you are right, about 125%
> of the local population were standing at the roadside, which has to be
> some sort of record.

I watched stage 1 from the roadside. I'm not counted in the population
of Kent or London. To my left was someone from Gloucester. To my right,
a couple from Lancashire IIRC. (I did meet various London residents
during the two days, though.)

Are Tivos even available in the UK now? I thought the Sky EPG stranglehold
was blocking most competing PVRs.

Regards,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/

Date: 09 Jul 2007 20:26:51
From: Jack Hollis
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Mon, 09 Jul 2007 10:35:09 +0100, Simon Brooke
<simon@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:

>> I assume that most of them were locals who came out to watch the bike
>> racers go by and then go home to catch up on the cricket, GP and
>> tennis on their Tivos.
>
>The entire population of Kent is 1,621,000. So if you are right, about 125%
>of the local population were standing at the roadside, which has to be
>some sort of record.

Must be the illegal aliens.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 12:11:37
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<oii7m4-jl.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk >,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:

> in message <1183907759.335079.221640@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> dustoyevsky@mac.com ('dustoyevsky@mac.com') wrote:
>
> >> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
> >> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
> >> demonizing them.
>
> This is complete, utter bollocks.

First, you corrupted the attributions.

Second, many people are repulsed by the doping scandals.

Third, KG's point is well made. People take things personally.

> Today, a British driver was in pole
> position on the podium on the British Grand Prix, and for the first time
> in donkey's years a British player was playing in a Wimbledon tennis
> final. Sussex - the next county to Kent - were playing India at cricket in
> Hove. So what were well over a million people - two percent of the whole
> population of Britain - doing?
>
> Standing on the roadside watching a bike race.
>
> What other sporting event could pull two percent of the whole population?
> A tiny, if vocal, minority are 'repulsed by doping'. The overwhelming
> majority are not bothered.

--
Michael Press

Date: 09 Jul 2007 10:28:56
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

in message <rubrum-CC539C.12113708072007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net >,
Michael Press ('rubrum@pacbell.net') wrote:

> In article
> <oii7m4-jl.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
> Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> in message <1183907759.335079.221640@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
>> dustoyevsky@mac.com ('dustoyevsky@mac.com') wrote:
>>
>> >> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
>> >> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
>> >> demonizing them.
>>
>> This is complete, utter bollocks.
>
> First, you corrupted the attributions.

Yes, apologies for that.

> Second, many people are repulsed by the doping scandals.

Define 'many'.

The roadside crowd yesterday is now being estimated at over two million,
while over one million watched at the roadside on Saturday. The population
of England (2002 figures) is 49 million. So that is 6% of the entire
population (or, allowing for the hard-core fans who turned out both days,
5.9%). And that's not counting the ones watching on television.

To put that in perspective, about as many people turned out for the Tour de
France on its two days in England as attended all events at the whole of
the Athens Olympics. The crowd yesterday, by itself, exceeded the capacity
of every football stadium in England put together.

So no. The public are not 'repulsed by doping'.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; Skill without imagination is craftsmanship and gives us
;; many useful objects such as wickerwork picnic baskets.
;; Imagination without skill gives us modern art.
;; Tom Stoppard, Artist Descending A Staircase

Date: 09 Jul 2007 16:07:28
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<onb9m4-h8b.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk >,
Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk > wrote:

> in message <rubrum-CC539C.12113708072007@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net>,
> Michael Press ('rubrum@pacbell.net') wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <oii7m4-jl.ln1@gododdin.internal.jasmine.org.uk>,
> > Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> in message <1183907759.335079.221640@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>,
> >> dustoyevsky@mac.com ('dustoyevsky@mac.com') wrote:
> >>
> >> >> People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
> >> >> happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
> >> >> demonizing them.
> >>
> >> This is complete, utter bollocks.

[...]

> > Second, many people are repulsed by the doping scandals.
>
> Define 'many'.

I for one.

> The roadside crowd yesterday is now being estimated at over two million,
> while over one million watched at the roadside on Saturday. The population
> of England (2002 figures) is 49 million. So that is 6% of the entire
> population (or, allowing for the hard-core fans who turned out both days,
> 5.9%). And that's not counting the ones watching on television.
>
> To put that in perspective, about as many people turned out for the Tour de
> France on its two days in England as attended all events at the whole of
> the Athens Olympics. The crowd yesterday, by itself, exceeded the capacity
> of every football stadium in England put together.
>
> So no. The public are not 'repulsed by doping'.

I said doping scandals, and I did not say `the people.'

--
Michael Press

Date: 09 Jul 2007 17:53:54
From: Dan Connelly
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

>> The roadside crowd yesterday is now being estimated at over two million,

That's around 5 per meter for 200 km, each side of the road.

I really don't think so....

Dan

Date: 10 Jul 2007 10:07:22
From: Simon Brooke
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

in message <LMAki.1538$m%.879@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net >, Dan Connelly
('d_j_c_o_n_n_e_l@y_a_h_o_o_._c_o_m') wrote:

>
>>> The roadside crowd yesterday is now being estimated at over two
>>> million,
>
> That's around 5 per meter for 200 km, each side of the road.
>
> I really don't think so....

Have you watched the video yet?

Scott Sunderland (directeur sportif at CSC): "The crowds have been huge and
I would have to think back to when the Tour went to Germany in 2000 in
Ulrich's home town, to see anything like that."

"I have never experienced anything like that," Fabian Wegman (Gerolsteiner)
said, and elaborated that there were so many people that it was actually
hard to take natural breaks. "It is a stupid situation. You are cycling
along and hope that after the next curve there is no fan so you can
relieve yourself."

Carlos Sastre (Team CSC): "Another thing that has caught my attention is
the quantity of spectators that have lined the stages. This it is my
seventh Tour and I believe that today was the most people I have seen
along the gutters. This is something that encourages us riders and helps
us to continue fighting."

Michael Rodgers (T-Mobile): "I think every rider I have spoken to has said
that the crowds here were about the biggest they'd ever seen at a bike
race."

David Millar (Saunier Duval): "I think it happens once in a lifetime only,
with such huge enthusiastic crowds lining the roads. It surprised us all,
even me."

So - general agreement from experienced riders that this was the biggest
crowd ever, and you're claiming that the Tour is 'straining to remain
credible'? Not with the people who matter, it isn't.

--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; how did we conclude that a fucking cartoon mouse is deserving
;; of 90+ years of protection, but a cure for cancer, only 14?
-- user 'Tackhead', in /. discussion of copyright law, 22/05/02

Date: 08 Jul 2007 20:19:27
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Simon Brooke <simon@jasmine.org.uk > writes:

> So what were well over a million people - two percent of the whole
> population of Britain - doing?
>
> Standing on the roadside watching a bike race.
>
> What other sporting event could pull two percent of the whole population?
> A tiny, if vocal, minority are 'repulsed by doping'. The overwhelming
> majority are not bothered.
>

Those crowds were truly unbelievable

Hopefully there will be renewed interest in cycling in Britain - at
all levels - not just in racing

And think what a boon that would be for the Bike and Accessories
manufacturers

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
Researchers at Harvard and McGill University (in Montreal) are working
on an amnesia drug that blocks or deletes bad memories. The technique
seems to allow psychiatrists to disrupt the biochemical pathways that
allow a memory to be recalled.
-
Of course they won't tell you that it does the same for good memories
as well . What , MTV does not leave you feeling 100% Zombiefied ? No
problem , take this magic pill and you too can become an absolute 100%
certified Zombie !

Date: 08 Jul 2007 08:06:12
From: dustoyevsky@mac.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 7, 3:58 pm, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:
> > Anyone who thinks the TdF is credible is a gullible fool.

Jump in the TdF peloton (if you could) and tell us about "credible"
after. Or maybe "incredible" <g >.

> ...And most of those are known to have been doped with the cooperation
> and supervision of the teams. It's rotten to the core.

By any word of description, it all comes from the top.

(getting out the hymn book, letting it fall open): Bad rules, pitiful
enforcement.

Fine-- and better yet, suspend!!!-- Dick Pound.

Go after the administrators with "death threat" suspensions and
automatic fines of a year's salary, and see how quick this mess gets
cleaned up.

If this is really (and it isn't) all about "fair competition", then
it's already "fair" if they're all dopers, aided and abetted by team
structure.

If this is really about "morality", then "lead us not into temptation"
by not making rules that are absurdly easy to break with little fear
of detection from governing bodies. --D-y

Date: 07 Jul 2007 17:43:53
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 6, 4:42 am, Jason Spaceman <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org >
wrote:

>
> Can it be done? Absolutely. Unlike so many other sports, cycling's tolerance
> for doping appears to be at an all-time low.

Dumbass -

And therein lies the problem.

People don't want to read about doping soap operas.

Doping is a fundamental part of modern life in the industrialized
world. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol, ritalin, viagra, aspirin,
marijuana, ibuprofen, ex-lax, immodium, ny-quil, birth control pills
(hormones), valium, xanax, prozac, xoloft, the list goes on and on and
on . . .

People are repulsed by the doping because by demonizing it, what's
happening in their subconscious is they also feel like you're
demonizing them. The fans. The fans use as many drugs as the riders.
It's part of life in the Western World. That list in the last
paragraph? We all have friends and family who have used, are using,
every single one of them.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 17:36:40
From: Kurgan Gringioni
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 7, 12:07 am, Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com > wrote:

> Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
> that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
> two years.

Dumbass -

Are you really a total moron or just pretending to be one?

That's the dumbest idea yet.

thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Date: 08 Jul 2007 10:44:35
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ernst Blofeld wrote:
>> Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
>> that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
>> two years.

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
> Are you really a total moron or just pretending to be one?
> That's the dumbest idea yet.

If he's pretending then he's a great pretender.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 13:58:18
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 7, 1:48 pm, critpo...@yahoo.com wrote:
> How can it be credible with this kind of recent history?
>
> 1996 Winner - Riis (admitted doper)
> 1997 Winner - Ullrich (proven doper)
> 1998 Festina Affair, Winner - Pantani (proven doper, now dead from
> illegal drug use)
> 1999 - 2005 Winner - Armstrong (suspected doper, gobs of evidence it's
> true, but still uncertain...)
> 2006 Winner - Landis (2 positive tests, total chaos ever since...)
>
> Anyone who thinks the TdF is credible is a gullible fool.

...And most of those are known to have been doped with the cooperation
and supervision of the teams. It's rotten to the core.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 13:48:16
From:
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

How can it be credible with this kind of recent history?

1996 Winner - Riis (admitted doper)
1997 Winner - Ullrich (proven doper)
1998 Festina Affair, Winner - Pantani (proven doper, now dead from
illegal drug use)
1999 - 2005 Winner - Armstrong (suspected doper, gobs of evidence it's
true, but still uncertain...)
2006 Winner - Landis (2 positive tests, total chaos ever since...)

Anyone who thinks the TdF is credible is a gullible fool.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 13:18:49
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 7, 11:20 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I disagree it is the rider who must be punished unless there is
> evidence that the teams management is involved.

That encourages the team management to look the other way for
individual dopers. The teams and riders have a better idea of who's
doping and who isn't, which has led to the omerta and cover-up
mentality of the sport. The incentive structure would encourage the
teams and the individual riders to prevent doping, because their
careers would be on the line, too.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 14:14:48
From: Michael Press
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

In article
<1183839529.366448.173230@x35g2000prf.googlegroups.com >
,
Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > wrote:

> On Jul 7, 11:20 am, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I disagree it is the rider who must be punished unless there is
> > evidence that the teams management is involved.
>
> That encourages the team management to look the other way for
> individual dopers. The teams and riders have a better idea of who's
> doping and who isn't, which has led to the omerta and cover-up
> mentality of the sport. The incentive structure would encourage the
> teams and the individual riders to prevent doping, because their
> careers would be on the line, too.

You talk like omerta is a bad thing.

--
Michael Press

Date: 07 Jul 2007 18:20:18
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

I disagree it is the rider who must be punished unless there is
evidence that the teams management is involved.

Another possible solution would be to levy a fine that is equal or
greater than the riders pay for that year.

On Jul 7, 1:28 am, Davey Crockett <d4Qaveycrock...@azurservers.com >
wrote:
> Ernst Blofeld <blofel...@hotmail.com> writes:
> > On Jul 6, 4:05 pm, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> I agree there needs to be a formalized procedure for teams and the UCI
> >> to conduct doping investigations and allegations. This guilt by
> >> association must stop.
>
> > Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
> > that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
> > two years.
>
> > A lot of the doping has required the connivance of the team to carry
> > EPO and blood bags. Remove the team support structure for doping and
> > you make it much more difficult.
>
> I have mixed feelings on that one
>
> There are lotsa Pros and Cons
>
> --
> Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
> -
> The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
> esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
> -Friedrich Nietzsche

Date: 07 Jul 2007 00:07:45
From: Ernst Blofeld
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

On Jul 6, 4:05 pm, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com > wrote:
> I agree there needs to be a formalized procedure for teams and the UCI
> to conduct doping investigations and allegations. This guilt by
> association must stop.

Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
two years.

A lot of the doping has required the connivance of the team to carry
EPO and blood bags. Remove the team support structure for doping and
you make it much more difficult.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 14:07:37
From: mal
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

> Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
> that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
> two years.
>
> A lot of the doping has required the connivance of the team to carry
> EPO and blood bags. Remove the team support structure for doping and
> you make it much more difficult.

Sounds like a great way to bring people together.

Are you Dick Pound?

Date: 07 Jul 2007 23:25:53
From: Donald Munro
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ernst Blofeld wrote:
> > Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
>> that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
>> two years.

mal wrote:
> Are you Dick Pound?

In that case perhaps James Bond will do us all a favour and terminate
Blofeld alias Pound with extreme prejudice.

Date: 07 Jul 2007 10:28:54
From: Davey Crockett
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

Ernst Blofeld <blofeld42@hotmail.com > writes:

> On Jul 6, 4:05 pm, "hizar...@yahoo.com" <hizar...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> I agree there needs to be a formalized procedure for teams and the UCI
>> to conduct doping investigations and allegations. This guilt by
>> association must stop.
>
> Actually, more guilt by association might be a good thing. Suppose
> that if any team member pops positive, all team members are banned for
> two years.
>
> A lot of the doping has required the connivance of the team to carry
> EPO and blood bags. Remove the team support structure for doping and
> you make it much more difficult.
>

I have mixed feelings on that one

There are lotsa Pros and Cons

--
Davey Crockett - No 4Q to Reply
-
The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
esteem those who think alike than those who think differently.
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Date: 06 Jul 2007 16:05:45
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

I agree there needs to be a formalized procedure for teams and the UCI
to conduct doping investigations and allegations. This guilt by
association must stop.

On Jul 6, 4:00 pm, "mal" <malcolm1...@comcast.net > wrote:

> The challenge is obviously around the doping.
>
> However the way for cycling to survive is to decide who they are fighting
> for. Right now they have spent too much time and energy in WADA / Dick
> Pound's camp. There is no joy for cycling in that camp.
>
> Dick Pound cares nothing for cycling. He will gladly give up every cyclist
> to meet his goals of a drug free sport. I am on his side in his goals but he
> has no ethics, nor conscience in the way he goes about it.
>
> He wants a "death" penalty without trial. He is not concerned about
> accuracy. Only about result.
>
> Cycling needs better strategists at the top. Now it has a bunch of old
> political weather vanes.

Date: 06 Jul 2007 19:00:00
From: mal
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

The challenge is obviously around the doping.

However the way for cycling to survive is to decide who they are fighting
for. Right now they have spent too much time and energy in WADA / Dick
Pound's camp. There is no joy for cycling in that camp.

Dick Pound cares nothing for cycling. He will gladly give up every cyclist
to meet his goals of a drug free sport. I am on his side in his goals but he
has no ethics, nor conscience in the way he goes about it.

He wants a "death" penalty without trial. He is not concerned about
accuracy. Only about result.

Cycling needs better strategists at the top. Now it has a bunch of old
political weather vanes.

Date: 06 Jul 2007 14:19:26
From: hizark21@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

The TDF is still credible, but if the sport wishes to remain strong it
is imperative that the UCI adopt a zero tolerance first use lifetime
ban policy.

I would like to see ASO exclude any rider from participating in any of
it's events that has tested positive regardless if he still is on
suspension.

On Jul 6, 4:42 am, Jason Spaceman <notrea...@jspaceman.homelinux.org >
wrote:
> From the article:
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> By Ann Killion
> Mercury News
> Article Launched: 07/05/2007 08:15:42 PM PDT
>
> The biggest climb in this year's Tour de France is hors categorie. Too
> difficult to classify. It is brutal, daunting. It may prove to be
> insurmountable.
>
> It is the climb up Mount Credibility.
>
> The Tour de France begins Saturday, with the Grand Depart in London. This
> year's race may kick off near the silhouette of Big Ben, but it really
> starts in the shadow of Big Scandal. The fury over doping in cycling has
> reached an all-time fever pitch.
>
> The Tour opens without its defending champion wearing jersey No. 1. That's
> because, in Tour officials' minds, there is no defending champion. Floyd
> Landis is in limbo, awaiting the outcome of his arbitration case while
> desperately pushing his new book and his proclaimed innocence. Both are a
> tough sell.
>
> Landis' dirty drug test was only the most high-profile event in a year of
> doping accusations and discoveries. Which is why this Tour de France, the
> 94th, is arguably the most important in history. The sport and its
> crown-jewel competition must reclaim credibility and legitimacy. The Tour
> must be a clean and compelling event.
>
> Can it be done? Absolutely. Unlike so many other sports, cycling's tolerance
> for doping appears to be at an all-time low. Testing is improved.
> Sponsorships are at stake. Teams are in disarray. The field may finally be
> leveling out.
>
> "There is no culture of doping," Landis insisted in the months since he
> tested positive for synthetic testosterone after his stunning victory last
> July.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Read it athttp://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6308521
>
> J. Spaceman

Date: 09 Jul 2007 06:38:43
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: Tour de France straining to remain credible

> The TDF is still credible, but if the sport wishes to remain strong it
> is imperative that the UCI adopt a zero tolerance first use lifetime
> ban policy.
>
> I would like to see ASO exclude any rider from participating in any of
> it's events that has tested positive regardless if he still is on
> suspension.

Would we also see a mechanism for riders wrongly accused to seek appropriate
remedy? Without that, the crusade is ridiculous. Accusations mean
everything, proof, or at least proof with a degree of certainty that would
stand up in a criminal courtroom, appears both elusive and irrelevant.
Presently, there seems to be no financial disincentive for the lab or
governing body to get things right. In my humble opinion, everything's a
sham until that situation is changed.

Zero tolerance sounds good on the surface, but if it means ruination of ones
livelihood before guilt beyond reasonable doubt is established, there's
nothing just or fair about it.

--Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReactionBicycles.com