Is amateur racing legit?
#176
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
The testing is also not the same. The pee in the cup is ensured in elite national top finishers. It is not in masters.
It should be rather obvious I as a 50+ (near 60) guy can get ED help, Insulin help - a bunch of help my 21 year old would find a bit more difficult to get.
It is easier and few care - esp at the national level for a master.
This is not a comment on relative ethics, or morals, rather - it is easier, and less tested.
Do you dispute that?
It should be rather obvious I as a 50+ (near 60) guy can get ED help, Insulin help - a bunch of help my 21 year old would find a bit more difficult to get.
It is easier and few care - esp at the national level for a master.
This is not a comment on relative ethics, or morals, rather - it is easier, and less tested.
Do you dispute that?
#178
out walking the earth
I realize you want to use BF as a forum to just argue about stuff, but 1/2 of what you write makes ponderously little sense. If you're actually saying you know of people doping I don't even know what to say to you. But I do know I can put you back on ignore. There is no statistical evidence that masters dope at a higher rate than other demographics, simply because there's not enough testing and no one has studied it. You can toss around whatever pet peeves or theories you want. But lacking some sort of statistical analysis it's all simple speculation And with that I'm out.
#179
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
I realize you want to use BF as a forum to just argue about stuff, but 1/2 of what you write makes ponderously little sense. If you're actually saying you know of people doping I don't even know what to say to you. But I do know I can put you back on ignore. There is no statistical evidence that masters dope at a higher rate than other demographics, simply because there's not enough testing and no one has studied it. You can toss around whatever pet peeves or theories you want. But lacking some sort of statistical analysis it's all simple speculation And with that I'm out.
Barato, 57
Sorensen, 43
Pate, 50
Pate, 48
Carrillo, 42
Frazier, 49
Bedford, 40
Diaz, 48
Brown, 53
Ainslie, 26
Mazur, 54
Gross, 59
Grove, 90
Lopez, 36
Strickler, 58
Moffett, 39
Tanski, 45
Gonzalez, 44
Last edited by Doge; 07-21-19 at 10:34 PM.
#180
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Shoot - I was going by gut. I know the under 30 guys. This seems to be mostly a masters issue. There are the reasons I stated - it is easier. But also a 20 something non-pro has stepped out. They have chosen not to compete at the top level. Sure, there are doper kids that have very little talent. They need parents to tell them to get another job. But I do stand by my statement. Seems the data backs me up.
#181
out walking the earth
The statistics and testing protocols are eluding you.
If they mainly test masters they're not going to catch 20 somethings.
You know how many 50 year olds test positive on the world tour? Not many. You know why?
Unless there are established and studied testing protocols conclusions can not be drawn.
What you're posting fits your narrative. But it doesn't have much statistical relevance.
On top of this your looking at this through ethnocentric eyes. This sport barely exists here. Wonder what's going on over in countries where people care about cycling?
There are, say, 100 races in NYC this year. Call it 3 fields at a race. Full fields. 100 people Of all those results they've caught no one. Sport must be clean. Only they haven't actually tested anyone.
If they mainly test masters they're not going to catch 20 somethings.
You know how many 50 year olds test positive on the world tour? Not many. You know why?
Unless there are established and studied testing protocols conclusions can not be drawn.
What you're posting fits your narrative. But it doesn't have much statistical relevance.
On top of this your looking at this through ethnocentric eyes. This sport barely exists here. Wonder what's going on over in countries where people care about cycling?
There are, say, 100 races in NYC this year. Call it 3 fields at a race. Full fields. 100 people Of all those results they've caught no one. Sport must be clean. Only they haven't actually tested anyone.
Last edited by gsteinb; 07-22-19 at 04:18 AM.
Likes For gsteinb:
#182
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 7,567
Mentioned: 54 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1851 Post(s)
Liked 675 Times
in
427 Posts
They test pretty aggressively at Masters Nationals. Typically, it's the top 3 on every podium. When you consider all the 5-year age groups there, that is a lot of testing of just Masters.
And that 90-year-old was the only racer in his field and was tested because he set a new record. He passed on day one of racing, but tested positive on day two of racing. USADA admits they don't think he did it intentionally.
And that 90-year-old was the only racer in his field and was tested because he set a new record. He passed on day one of racing, but tested positive on day two of racing. USADA admits they don't think he did it intentionally.
#183
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,552
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4195 Post(s)
Liked 2,911 Times
in
1,780 Posts
Adderall or ritalin or whatever upper to help you stay up and focus while studying for tests while in college is totally a thing. As a college professor, I hear enough students talking about it to know that many more aren't talking about it when they are aware that I'm around and could hear them.
Likes For himespau:
#184
out walking the earth
They test pretty aggressively at Masters Nationals. Typically, it's the top 3 on every podium. When you consider all the 5-year age groups there, that is a lot of testing of just Masters.
And that 90-year-old was the only racer in his field and was tested because he set a new record. He passed on day one of racing, but tested positive on day two of racing. USADA admits they don't think he did it intentionally.
And that 90-year-old was the only racer in his field and was tested because he set a new record. He passed on day one of racing, but tested positive on day two of racing. USADA admits they don't think he did it intentionally.
I dont acually think that’s true on the scale you present. I’ve been to plenty of nationals and have barely seen testing. Is there some? Yeah. Is it enough to draw statistical conclusions around masters racers vs a world wide cadre of open racers? No. Hell no. If someone wants to argue maters racers dope I’m all in aggrreemenr. The broad generalization and certitude of what demographics do what andvto what extent ai simply silly. USADA cherry picks based on tips. That’s the official line. I Ive been to masters mats where they didn’t even show up.
Likes For gsteinb:
#185
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Adderall or ritalin or whatever upper to help you stay up and focus while studying for tests while in college is totally a thing. As a college professor, I hear enough students talking about it to know that many more aren't talking about it when they are aware that I'm around and could hear them.
That doesn't mean it doesn't help them, but it will keep them off the list.
I guess the question is, is legally getting help legit?
#186
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
The statistics and testing protocols are eluding you.
If they mainly test masters they're not going to catch 20 somethings.
You know how many 50 year olds test positive on the world tour? Not many. You know why?
Unless there are established and studied testing protocols conclusions can not be drawn.
What you're posting fits your narrative. But it doesn't have much statistical relevance.
On top of this your looking at this through ethnocentric eyes. This sport barely exists here. Wonder what's going on over in countries where people care about cycling?
There are, say, 100 races in NYC this year. Call it 3 fields at a race. Full fields. 100 people Of all those results they've caught no one. Sport must be clean. Only they haven't actually tested anyone.
If they mainly test masters they're not going to catch 20 somethings.
You know how many 50 year olds test positive on the world tour? Not many. You know why?
Unless there are established and studied testing protocols conclusions can not be drawn.
What you're posting fits your narrative. But it doesn't have much statistical relevance.
On top of this your looking at this through ethnocentric eyes. This sport barely exists here. Wonder what's going on over in countries where people care about cycling?
There are, say, 100 races in NYC this year. Call it 3 fields at a race. Full fields. 100 people Of all those results they've caught no one. Sport must be clean. Only they haven't actually tested anyone.
A top 20 something is a pro, and that takes them out of scope of this thread. I was aware of a junior with a TUE. That is out of scope of not being legit.
Last edited by Doge; 07-22-19 at 08:41 PM.
#187
Version 7.0
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 13,097
Bikes: Too Many
Mentioned: 297 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1325 Post(s)
Liked 2,438 Times
in
1,425 Posts
As a masters racer, I am happy they are testing racers. I am not happy that racers are getting caught per se. My reason is that all the talk and testing makes racing seems odd at best and sleazy at worst. In a world of many choices why race?
I cannot comment on the validity of generalizations based upon limited data sets. All I know is that UCI/WADA/USADA tested UCI world tour racers a lot including at location testing not just races and only caught them when they ratted on each other (Lance and his merry men). Maybe the younger racers are more adept / skilled at doping than masters.
Also, I suspect that masters that are being caught today have been doping for quite some time. At some point in time crooks get caught because they get careless and too bold.
I cannot comment on the validity of generalizations based upon limited data sets. All I know is that UCI/WADA/USADA tested UCI world tour racers a lot including at location testing not just races and only caught them when they ratted on each other (Lance and his merry men). Maybe the younger racers are more adept / skilled at doping than masters.
Also, I suspect that masters that are being caught today have been doping for quite some time. At some point in time crooks get caught because they get careless and too bold.
Last edited by Hermes; 07-22-19 at 11:14 AM.
Likes For Hermes:
#188
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Queens, NY for now...
Posts: 1,533
Bikes: 82 Lotus Unique, 86 Lotus Legend, 88 Basso Loto, 88 Basso PR, 89 Basso PR, 96 Bianchi CDI, 2013 Deda Aegis, 2019 Basso Diamante SV
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times
in
113 Posts
I know of no 20-30 year old non-pros I even suspect. Certainly, I don't know. I have many older ones I suspect. That all means nothing.
But to my response. It is very easy for an older guy to get help for things from ED to Low T, Insulin etc. These may all be legit. They are also not allowed in cycling. A 20 something needing the same help and also being a racer - may raise more eyebrows. College often wins over being a National competitor in cycling. At that stage, cycling is recreation. Then some dope for taking better tests too, but I think it is rare once in college, and more before.
If you are 20 something and going to dope, you better be getting paid for it.
But to my response. It is very easy for an older guy to get help for things from ED to Low T, Insulin etc. These may all be legit. They are also not allowed in cycling. A 20 something needing the same help and also being a racer - may raise more eyebrows. College often wins over being a National competitor in cycling. At that stage, cycling is recreation. Then some dope for taking better tests too, but I think it is rare once in college, and more before.
If you are 20 something and going to dope, you better be getting paid for it.
And that's almost separate from the shallow people that simply don't mind cheating in order to win something. And there are tons of people out there like that, in all walks of life (students doping to do better on tests), and all the "everyone else is doing it," and "I have an issue, so this just makes it fair for me," just makes it easier for them to justify their choices.
Lastly, on TUE's, just look at some of the big names that had no issues getting them. Froome and his "asthma." Simone Biles and her ADD. The Williams sisters and whatever ailments they claim to have. Finding a crooked doctor is just as easy as finding a crooked athlete...
#189
I got a fever.
I'm not an expert on the sport or on the scene, but your outlook on general human nature seems a bit naive. People don't need to be getting paid to dope. They are just as likely, if not more likely, to dope in order to get paid in the first place. Did you see that recent interview with Armstrong on NBC? He admitted that he would have done it all over again, because of the prospect of going back to Texas as a failed, no-name cyclist was just too much for him to bear. It was a fascinating and telling moment. How many of these guys are facing similar choices? How many are already in obscurity, and desperate for a way out?
And that's almost separate from the shallow people that simply don't mind cheating in order to win something. And there are tons of people out there like that, in all walks of life (students doping to do better on tests), and all the "everyone else is doing it," and "I have an issue, so this just makes it fair for me," just makes it easier for them to justify their choices.
Lastly, on TUE's, just look at some of the big names that had no issues getting them. Froome and his "asthma." Simone Biles and her ADD. The Williams sisters and whatever ailments they claim to have. Finding a crooked doctor is just as easy as finding a crooked athlete...
And that's almost separate from the shallow people that simply don't mind cheating in order to win something. And there are tons of people out there like that, in all walks of life (students doping to do better on tests), and all the "everyone else is doing it," and "I have an issue, so this just makes it fair for me," just makes it easier for them to justify their choices.
Lastly, on TUE's, just look at some of the big names that had no issues getting them. Froome and his "asthma." Simone Biles and her ADD. The Williams sisters and whatever ailments they claim to have. Finding a crooked doctor is just as easy as finding a crooked athlete...
#190
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
I'm not an expert on the sport or on the scene, but your outlook on general human nature seems a bit naive. People don't need to be getting paid to dope. They are just as likely, if not more likely, to dope in order to get paid in the first place. Did you see that recent interview with Armstrong on NBC? He admitted that he would have done it all over again, because of the prospect of going back to Texas as a failed, no-name cyclist was just too much for him to bear. It was a fascinating and telling moment. How many of these guys are facing similar choices? How many are already in obscurity, and desperate for a way out?
...
...
All 40+ racers are amateurs. The most serious/best performers in the 20-30s are not. So besides the easier of legitimate access to PEDs a 40, 50 etc. has, you have all competitors in that age group in there. Ex-pros, world champions all types. When they were 20-30s they were pros too. And if they were doping then, they were doping as pros - so out of scope of this thread as is Armstrong / other pros.
There were/are several top cyclists that made the choice to step out of being a pro. Choosing not to compete at that level and then doping so you can, is something I don't see. Instead they train when they can around work, school and go race. If they took cycling as seriously as the other things in life - they'd be pros, and there might be more reason to dope.
...
Lastly, on TUE's, just look at some of the big names that had no issues getting them. Froome and his "asthma." Simone Biles and her ADD. The Williams sisters and whatever ailments they claim to have. Finding a crooked doctor is just as easy as finding a crooked athlete...
Lastly, on TUE's, just look at some of the big names that had no issues getting them. Froome and his "asthma." Simone Biles and her ADD. The Williams sisters and whatever ailments they claim to have. Finding a crooked doctor is just as easy as finding a crooked athlete...
#191
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,552
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4195 Post(s)
Liked 2,911 Times
in
1,780 Posts
The thing that folks do not seem to be acknowledging in my posts is the scope is narrowed for the 20-30 year old group. I am responding to the scope of this post - Amateurs. In that group you have all the best in the world - for their age, who even doped are not good enough to be pro. And you have a group that know they are not going to be pros, because of choice, or because of ability. The latter group is generally getting better (age) and the former declining (age).
All 40+ racers are amateurs. The most serious/best performers in the 20-30s are not. So besides the easier of legitimate access to PEDs a 40, 50 etc. has, you have all competitors in that age group in there. Ex-pros, world champions all types. When they were 20-30s they were pros too. And if they were doping then, they were doping as pros - so out of scope of this thread as is Armstrong / other pros.
There were/are several top cyclists that made the choice to step out of being a pro. Choosing not to compete at that level and then doping so you can, is something I don't see. Instead they train when they can around work, school and go race. If they took cycling as seriously as the other things in life - they'd be pros, and there might be more reason to dope.
All 40+ racers are amateurs. The most serious/best performers in the 20-30s are not. So besides the easier of legitimate access to PEDs a 40, 50 etc. has, you have all competitors in that age group in there. Ex-pros, world champions all types. When they were 20-30s they were pros too. And if they were doping then, they were doping as pros - so out of scope of this thread as is Armstrong / other pros.
There were/are several top cyclists that made the choice to step out of being a pro. Choosing not to compete at that level and then doping so you can, is something I don't see. Instead they train when they can around work, school and go race. If they took cycling as seriously as the other things in life - they'd be pros, and there might be more reason to dope.
Just because you can separate amateurs out into groups, identify why they fit into those groups, and say why it doesn't make sense for anyone in each of the groups to dope for group-specific reasons, doesn't mean that they'd all agree with the group you've put them in or your reasons for why people in that group shouldn't dope. Hell, some people don't see that there's anything wrong with doping (as long as they are smart enough to get caught - they only look down on those who they feel must obviously be dumb since they got caught), and don't feel that they need a good reason. Some people like putting substances (of all sorts, even if they cause long term consequences) in their bodies because it makes them feel good. Some people like riding their bikes fast because it makes them feel good. Some people like putting substances in their bodies because it allows them to go faster and going faster makes them feel good.
#192
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
But this is not a pro thread. It is not about cheating on tests, or Tue Night Worlds. The OP groups people. They are not pros.
There are assumptions I make I can make, all have exceptions:
-USAC Cat 1-5 racers are what the OP is asking about, those not also doing pro races.
-human characteristic are equally distributed across all age groups
-Ease of access to some PEDs varies by age group (and gender).
-Age maters for performance - you get better in cycling till about 30 (+/- 5 years), you get worse ( then not offset by training and substances)
-Winners do things those they beat don't do (in general, there are overlaps). This is typically training, but includes travel, equipment and what they put in their bodies.
-A 20-30 something doing the same things as the top 40+ something is a pro.
The top 20-30 somethings are not in this group, which the OP introduced, I didn't.
As such the facts of masters racers getting about 10X the sanctions as those is their 20 would be about what you expect with my assumptions and when you take out the most aggressive fastest riders.
#193
out walking the earth
Doge you're bizarrely hung up on the OP. Conversations evolve. The OP was from October.
That said in cycling amateurs regularly race against folks from other categories, including pros. And while most won't race against WT pros many do race against domestic pros or guys who can race across in the big leagues. People on each level want to improve and make the next level. If someone is doping in there it's bound to change the level of the playing field.
That said, we got it. In your view masters are the problem. Gear restrictions are equivalent to someone doing EPO, and the lack of any statistical protocol is irrelevant to the fact that masters clearly dope in far greater number than any demographic. Funny thing is the next one to get popped is probably someone in your kid's cohort. So tread carefully with all the silliness you spout. You're apt to need to do mia culpas at some point. Because the one thing the statistics have shown is that the overwhelming majority of guys racing on the pointy end of the world stage are dirty. And odds are that doesn't start when they get there.
That said in cycling amateurs regularly race against folks from other categories, including pros. And while most won't race against WT pros many do race against domestic pros or guys who can race across in the big leagues. People on each level want to improve and make the next level. If someone is doping in there it's bound to change the level of the playing field.
That said, we got it. In your view masters are the problem. Gear restrictions are equivalent to someone doing EPO, and the lack of any statistical protocol is irrelevant to the fact that masters clearly dope in far greater number than any demographic. Funny thing is the next one to get popped is probably someone in your kid's cohort. So tread carefully with all the silliness you spout. You're apt to need to do mia culpas at some point. Because the one thing the statistics have shown is that the overwhelming majority of guys racing on the pointy end of the world stage are dirty. And odds are that doesn't start when they get there.
#194
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 13,552
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4195 Post(s)
Liked 2,911 Times
in
1,780 Posts
Maybe some are. But there are some 20-30 somethings that just aren't as genetically gifted to get to that level. Or maybe they don't have quite the time to train or desire to put that much effort in but still want results. Not everyone is your kid. Plenty of people at all levels want shortcuts. Some folks at all levels want a boost just so they can finish a century, a fondo, or a marathon just so that they can go into work (or the bar trying to score chicks) and say that they did this feat and see scoring a little T (hey, it's natural, it's in your body anyway, I just want a bit more) as a way to do that.
#195
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California, USA
Posts: 10,474
Bikes: 1979 Raleigh Team 753
Mentioned: 153 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3374 Post(s)
Liked 371 Times
in
253 Posts
Maybe some are. But there are some 20-30 somethings that just aren't as genetically gifted to get to that level. Or maybe they don't have quite the time to train or desire to put that much effort in but still want results. Not everyone is your kid. Plenty of people at all levels want shortcuts. Some folks at all levels want a boost just so they can finish a century, a fondo, or a marathon just so that they can go into work (or the bar trying to score chicks) and say that they did this feat and see scoring a little T (hey, it's natural, it's in your body anyway, I just want a bit more) as a way to do that.
Anyway, that is a subjective argument trying to explain the facts that USAC masters racers are sanctioned about 10X as often as non-masters.
Why do you think that is?
#196
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Redlands, CA
Posts: 6,313
Mentioned: 31 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 842 Post(s)
Liked 469 Times
in
250 Posts
You seem to assume that all 20-30 year olds are rational actors with the same morals you have. I'd bet there are some 20-30 year old elites that you'd put in the "not good enough to be pros even if they doped" group who think that if they dope they will be good enough and are willing to give it a try. I'd also bet that there are some 20-30 year olds that find that life means that they can't train as much as their friends but still want to compete with them (and I'd be that there are some who just want to be able to compete for bragging rights at Tuesday Night Worlds rides) that will take a little something extra to try to make up for the fact that they can't train as much (because "it's not fair that I no longer have as much time as ____ to train, so this is just balancing things to make up for it"). And I'd bet that there are some who think that it doesn't matter since they're unlikely to be caught, it's fun to go faster and/or hurt less, so who gives a ****, why not? And that's just at the pointy end. I'd bet there are also a number of 3's and 2's that are tired of waiting to get the points to get promoted and think, "who's going to know, they don't ever test 3's" and take a little something to get there a little faster.
Just because you can separate amateurs out into groups, identify why they fit into those groups, and say why it doesn't make sense for anyone in each of the groups to dope for group-specific reasons, doesn't mean that they'd all agree with the group you've put them in or your reasons for why people in that group shouldn't dope. Hell, some people don't see that there's anything wrong with doping (as long as they are smart enough to get caught - they only look down on those who they feel must obviously be dumb since they got caught), and don't feel that they need a good reason. Some people like putting substances (of all sorts, even if they cause long term consequences) in their bodies because it makes them feel good. Some people like riding their bikes fast because it makes them feel good. Some people like putting substances in their bodies because it allows them to go faster and going faster makes them feel good.
Just because you can separate amateurs out into groups, identify why they fit into those groups, and say why it doesn't make sense for anyone in each of the groups to dope for group-specific reasons, doesn't mean that they'd all agree with the group you've put them in or your reasons for why people in that group shouldn't dope. Hell, some people don't see that there's anything wrong with doping (as long as they are smart enough to get caught - they only look down on those who they feel must obviously be dumb since they got caught), and don't feel that they need a good reason. Some people like putting substances (of all sorts, even if they cause long term consequences) in their bodies because it makes them feel good. Some people like riding their bikes fast because it makes them feel good. Some people like putting substances in their bodies because it allows them to go faster and going faster makes them feel good.
This year we have 2 guys that broke the KOM's at Worlds; one is a relative no name (former runner) and another is a former Cat 2 that came back. Both get free coaching, free bikes, one got a job at the LBS, and a bunch of other incentives. In the same token, someone could win an industrial crit and no one would care.
First two years I rode here I was awful at World's, and there were people that wouldn't talk to me (or anyone else slow). Once I started dropping them did they actually accept me into the social group; it was almost like one of those teenage movies where the nerd becomes cool, and even then you have the guys that only talk to 'pros' (which are usually former DPros). Cycling has an caste system, and I can see guys doping just to move up it.
#197
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Queens, NY for now...
Posts: 1,533
Bikes: 82 Lotus Unique, 86 Lotus Legend, 88 Basso Loto, 88 Basso PR, 89 Basso PR, 96 Bianchi CDI, 2013 Deda Aegis, 2019 Basso Diamante SV
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times
in
113 Posts
Punctuation simply helps people understand what you are trying to say, no matter what you are saying. Period. Pun intended.
If you can't write clearly, then in a forum like this one you cannot communicate clearly. And if you cannot communicate clearly, don't expect people to understand what you are saying, and don't expect them to pick up on some claimed sarcasm.
#198
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Missouri
Posts: 2,689
Bikes: Giant Propel, Cannondale SuperX, Univega Alpina Ultima
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 672 Post(s)
Liked 413 Times
in
246 Posts
There may be a few misguided newbies who engage in some minor doping, but it's simply not worth the expense and hassle for the occasional payday, and if you have the talent to excel at regional and national events, you will very soon find yourself in races where anti- doping controls are in place.
So yes, amateur racing is legit. The guys at the top are there because they're fast.
__________________
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
Formerly fastest rider in the grupetto, currently slowest guy in the peloton
#199
I got a fever.
Maybe some are. But there are some 20-30 somethings that just aren't as genetically gifted to get to that level. Or maybe they don't have quite the time to train or desire to put that much effort in but still want results. Not everyone is your kid. Plenty of people at all levels want shortcuts. Some folks at all levels want a boost just so they can finish a century, a fondo, or a marathon just so that they can go into work (or the bar trying to score chicks) and say that they did this feat and see scoring a little T (hey, it's natural, it's in your body anyway, I just want a bit more) as a way to do that.
#200
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Queens, NY for now...
Posts: 1,533
Bikes: 82 Lotus Unique, 86 Lotus Legend, 88 Basso Loto, 88 Basso PR, 89 Basso PR, 96 Bianchi CDI, 2013 Deda Aegis, 2019 Basso Diamante SV
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 943 Post(s)
Liked 171 Times
in
113 Posts
Just because you can separate amateurs out into groups, identify why they fit into those groups, and say why it doesn't make sense for anyone in each of the groups to dope for group-specific reasons, doesn't mean that they'd all agree with the group you've put them in or your reasons for why people in that group shouldn't dope. Hell, some people don't see that there's anything wrong with doping (as long as they are smart enough to get caught - they only look down on those who they feel must obviously be dumb since they got caught), and don't feel that they need a good reason. Some people like putting substances (of all sorts, even if they cause long term consequences) in their bodies because it makes them feel good. Some people like riding their bikes fast because it makes them feel good. Some people like putting substances in their bodies because it allows them to go faster and going faster makes them feel good.
There may be a few misguided newbies who engage in some minor doping, but it's simply not worth the expense and hassle for the occasional payday, and if you have the talent to excel at regional and national events, you will very soon find yourself in races where anti- doping controls are in place.
So yes, amateur racing is legit. The guys at the top are there because they're fast.
So yes, amateur racing is legit. The guys at the top are there because they're fast.