RobbieTunes

Armstrong Lies and Icarus.

Really opened my eyes more to what I already thought was (is) happening.

jamesdak 

Does anyone believe thr pro peloton is clean even today?

camjr

Icarus was amazing.

samanthadavies

Will have to check them out, what are they about?

ryansu

I still occasionally watch the TdF especially the mountain stages but I have no illusions and I doubt it has every been 'Clean" going back to the beginning. As for he who must not be named- that guy has already claimed more than enough of my time so I will pass on his documentary. Inspired to ride is a interesting cycle documentry on Netflix. I have no desire to do that sort of riding but it was a good film.

Kobe 

I read all the Armstrong books and believed him at the time. I have come this far so I might as well see the movie too.

Sir_Name 

Icarus is well worth a watch. Much heavier than expected.

canklecat

Looking forward to watching Icarus. But it won't change my opinion. Doping should be legalized. There are several valid reasons why anti-doping is not only doomed to fail, but wrongheaded.

First of all, technology cannot be denied. That is the nature of tech. If a thing can be done, it will be done. There is no point in history where any technological advancement was successfully thwarted, whether by peer pressure or reguation. Technology always prevails because it has no agenda other than to exist. If it offers something humans want, humans will acquire and use it. No exceptions, ever.

Attempting to ban doping only serves to widen the gap between the haves and have-nots. The best funded athletes will prevail because they can afford the medical specialists, attorneys and bribes needed to hide the doping. Meanwhile the less prosperous athletes will be left irretrievably behind.

There is a lot of money in sports, increasingly with little distinction between professional and amateur. Money changes everything. Even amateur events have long been tainted by external forces -- mainly gambling -- and internal forces, mainly the athletes themselves who crave success at any price.

Even more than cycling, professional boxing is an example of the pervasive effect of money and power on every aspect of the game, including doping. Does anyone really believe the great champion Juan Manuel Marquez really bulked up from his peak featherweight form to welterweight just drinking his own urine to fight Floyd Mayweather in 2009? Look carefully at the high resolution photos and videos of Marquez in 2009 against Mayweather, and again in 2012 when Marquez knocked out Manny Pacquiao. Marquez was ripped, faster and stronger at the same weight. That doesn't happen from drinking urine. And Pacquiao is also unquestionably also a doper. Moving up from flyweight to welterweight and still looking ripped, lean and strong, without PEDs? Not very damn likely. In the entire history of the greatest boxing champs before the contemporary PED era, there is not a single comparable example of a great champion moving up that many weight classes without getting pudgy.

There's too much money involved all around to stop it. And it's pointless to stop it because, in the minds of the athletes, they're already taking risks to their health and lives just to participate in the sport, even without doping. A boxer can be permanently disabled or killed by brain damage. A cyclist can be disabled or killed by a crash. Why *wouldn't* they want the advantages of anything that makes them stronger, faster, better able to control themselves to evade danger in a split second?

It's not just about winning. It's about creating the best possible human instrument.

Pretty soon we'll be forced to stop moralizing about human development when we're confronted with genetically enhanced specimens of humans from China, Russia and other countries that don't cripple themselves with backward thinking about maximizing the human potential. We'll either adapt or be left behind.

Keep in mind these advances that enhance athletic performance are akin to technological advances used in car racing that are eventually adopted by the consumer automobile industry to make our vehicles safer, more reliable and fuel efficient.

By permitting any form of enhancement to professional athletes, we'll see developments that benefit us all, in making us healthier, stronger, better able to recover from injuries and illnesses, and to repair those damages.

It will also encourage development of enhancements that won't harm an athlete's health. This under the table, back alley stuff only leads to poor quality and practices. Sure, some athletes may continue to choose risky stuff, or take too much, hoping for an advantage over more naturally gifted and skilled opponents. But decriminalizing or legitimizing PEDs and physical enhancement will give more participants the information and ability to choose proven methods that pose less risk to their health.

Or we could just choose to be cavemen and pretend the world around us isn't changing.

Bikerider007

Thanks! Was just scrolling for a new series or something to watch tonight.

Vintage_Cyclist

Armstrong's biggest crime wasn't doping, it was using his influence and power to try and destroy anyone who pointed out his lies. While he may still be a great cyclist, with or without the doping, it's hard to look at the facts and not come away with the belief he's a sociopath and a pathological liar.

ThermionicScott 

Another very thought-provoking post, @canklecat.

thinktubes 

Or any sport - even curling.

cb400bill

Thread moved from C&V to General Cycling.

sdmc530

I really want to think it is but like all sports, it’s pretty widespread. I like to think the better though. Except Froom, dirty as hell imo.

canklecat

Some international shooters have been penalized for using propranolol and other drugs to reduce their heart rate and for an overall calming effect. A Korean shooter lost his Olympic medals after testing positive.

And that's about the last drug I'd want to take. I had a prescription for propranolol several years ago to help control migraines. The stuff made me feel dopey and it aggravates asthma in some people, including me. I already have a hard enough time breathing while exercising.

veganbikes

While I don't care for doping, it seems like it is happening and we need to figure out how to best deal with it. Banning it doesn't work because then you create a criminal aspect and make people want to do it and making it a legal free for all also might not make sense because then maybe people will decide screw it and just go crazy.

I wish Armstrong had come out and admitted to doping right away and didn't turn out to be such a jerk about it. He was kind of exciting and I loathe to think about him as a villain rather than just a great cyclist who also happened to dope.

Ald1 

Very thoughtful post Canklecat. No easy answers here for sure as I agree that it will always be around. The problem, I see is if we open that pandora's box and make doping legal what does that mean? Everything and anything OK? We will then see lots of athletes dropping dead because, I agree with you there will be a percentage of folks that will do and take anything to win.
With the transhuman movent gaining steam (God help us) will a computer chip implanted in you to fire your leg muscles faster be OK if it does the same thing as a formally banned, now accepted drug but has no ill heath effects? How about nano motor knees? We already have "mechanical doping". When does it not become "you" that's winning. How will we define "you"? Look at a new state H.S. men's wrestling champ (forget the state) who was a born "she" now transitioning to a "he" and takes massive dosage testosterone. This OK/fair? Should her/his competitors be allowed the same drug at the same dosage to level the playing field?
Guess the counter argument to a no drug ban is the "slippery slope" one. For sure no easy answers.

Sy Reene

Isn't the trick about how do you make prescription drugs legally prescribed by doctors who are legally obligated to only prescribe for necessity? IOW, how do you make prescription drugs legal for pro echelon athletes, but not for anyone else?

bruce19

Exactly my thoughts. What he did to people like the LeMonds and Adreus was the stuff of sociopaths. Seems like a horrible person.

RidingMatthew

Icarus is on my list to watch but I have not gotten around to it. is it depressing? someone said it was heavy. I am tired of the sad, bad news.

FrenchFit 

Heavy? I thought it was more of a comedy, OK a black comedy perhaps. Afterall, Bryan Fogel, stand-up comic turned Jewtopia playwright, turned cycling geek, turned documentarian... not exactly a 60 Minutes treatment.

FrenchFit 

I think the arch of history tends to (slowly) bend in the other direction Think communism, fascism, DDT, genetic engineering, fossil fuels dependency, CTE, etc., etc. The advantages of doping are fairly obvious, but I doubt human beings will ever fully consent to it as acceptable practice or a necessity for society. My sense is AI is far more likely to be embraced and blindly accepted.

SquidPuppet

I have a Netflix account. Discs, not streaming. I don't see Icarus there. Did you stream it?

Milton Keynes

Maybe we should have an All Drug Olympics:

https://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-l...olympics/n9691

canklecat

Yup, it's probably the liveliest, most entertaining treatment of the issue you'll find. So far I've watched only the trailer and some interviews with Fogel and it sounds fascinating and a bit bizarre and absurd. I can almost imagine it as an early Mel Brooks movie musical, with Zero Mostel as the Russian doping scientist, Gene Wilder as Fogel, and Jack Nicholson as Putin.