Poll

Apparently there'a vacancy, I'd vote for Andy Wilkinson, but my opinion is not to be trusted.

Lance Armstrong
28 (40.6%)
US Postal/ Discovery
2 (2.9%)
Someone else on drugs.
13 (18.8%)
Anyone you felt never got a fair crack of the whip
10 (14.5%)
Jens Voigt
16 (23.2%)

Total Members Voted: 57

Author Topic: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005  (Read 7561 times)

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #25 on: September 03, 2012, 02:24:25 pm »
How about we declare:

1998 and before: the "open" era. Recognise that doping was widespread and the deterrence of drug testing was of limited use. No change in results as they currently stand.

1999 to 2012: the "void" era. All results null and void, for all races. This is the transition era. Again, recognise there is widespread doping and let's not pretend only those who failed a dope test doped.

2013 -  : the "controlled" era. This marks a clean break from the previous "doped" years. I'm not sure how drug tests are currently done but needless to say it has to get much more strict; random tests throughout the year, samples kept indefinitely for re-testing in the future, immediate lifetime bans, all training methods and chemical intake declared etc.

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #26 on: September 03, 2012, 02:29:32 pm »
Good luck with the 'controlled' era, given that we have the same organisation, team administration, doctors, suppliers and racers as now. Dopers win and rarely get caught.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

vorsprung

  • Opposites Attract
    • Audaxing
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #27 on: September 03, 2012, 02:30:34 pm »

2013 -  : the "controlled" era. This marks a clean break from the previous "doped" years. I'm not sure how drug tests are currently done but needless to say it has to get much more strict; random tests throughout the year, samples kept indefinitely for re-testing in the future, immediate lifetime bans, all training methods and chemical intake declared etc.

Until someone invents something more effective than EPO that cannot be detected
Audaxing Blog follow @vorsprungbike on

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #28 on: September 03, 2012, 02:35:45 pm »
The only way to prevent doping will be to have quarantined hotels and strict chaperoning. It would be like trying to run a 3000 mile long prison.

What you are advocating is essentially a razing of the ground. A scorcehd earth policy. What it will do (without the very expensive enforcement) is to continue as before except that the current management will be replaced by a new crowd, and teh curernt people will still be there but in the shadows.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #29 on: September 03, 2012, 02:38:45 pm »
Actually, the only thing that could work is to have a permanent chaperone with each rider who is above a certain point on the GC (say the top 25) or leading the various standings. The cost would only be bourne by the biggest of races, and the chaperones would have to be randomly assigned every night to avoid financially induced blindness.
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #30 on: September 03, 2012, 02:55:39 pm »
Not the only approach.

The results of being found to be doping could be high enough to discourage racers from taking part. Currently, only a few are caught and the consequences are not great. Vino has done just fine.

Armstrong has kept a lid on his team's doping for years by intimidation, bribery and public adulation. Proving to racers, their management and support staff that doping will eventually be uncovered and harshly punished, regardless of who you are or when it happens is a powerful deterrent to doping.

That approach is the line to be drawn in the sand.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

citoyen

  • Cat 6 Racer
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #31 on: September 03, 2012, 03:09:31 pm »
I haven't voted on the poll because the option I want isn't there: "No one"

Clearly, Lance should be stripped of his titles, but that doesn't have to mean someone else should be awarded them.

d.

mattc

  • n.b. have grown beard since photo taken
    • Didcot Audaxes
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #32 on: September 03, 2012, 03:25:50 pm »
I'm sensing some confusion between drawing lines in the sand, drawing a line under some things, and underlining other things.
Has never ridden RAAM
---------
No.11  Because of the great host of those who dislike the least appearance of "swank " when they travel the roads and lanes. - From Kuklos' 39 Articles

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #33 on: September 03, 2012, 03:38:29 pm »
No confusion on my part. Tell the racing community that doping will be punished and then back it up by actually doing it, even to the biggest names. After several prosecutions, the racers, management and the rest will understand that you mean it and you can draw a line saying 'before now they doped lots. Afterwards, less.' and actually have the words means something. Those words have been meaningless for decades due to not wanting to change the status quo.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #34 on: September 03, 2012, 03:59:07 pm »
Take out the ones that you can prove did it. Armstrong and Bruyneel fits that requirement, in spades.

Take out the ones that encouraged/ required doping by their teammates and suppressed adverse comment by others in the peloton and media. Guess who.

Take out the ones that have been protected by the UCI. That would be LA and Bruyneel again.

This isn't just somebody gaining an unfair win. This is much bigger than that. Wiping your hands and saying 'All too difficult, continue on.' is just encouraging the practice. You are saying "Winning, by any means, is all that counts. It doesn't even matter if you get caught, you'll not lose anything."

But what about all the others - or don't you care about them?
We are making a New World (Paul Nash, 1918)

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #35 on: September 03, 2012, 04:29:08 pm »
Go after everybody. We have people saying 'leave the very worst offenders alone', despite all the evidence. Take them down first and then go after the next biggest.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #36 on: September 03, 2012, 04:48:55 pm »
What will bring them down is the sponsors attempting to reclaim their money. Strip titles and watch the lawsuits begin. (and a mandatory 4 year ban for a first offence).
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #37 on: September 03, 2012, 04:54:34 pm »
Removing their titles is a must; just leave the result blank.

I'm hoping the lawsuits start flying. Actions should have consequences.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

David Martin

  • Thats Dr Oi You thankyouverymuch
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #38 on: September 03, 2012, 04:57:21 pm »
The problem of saying 'go after everyone' is a practical one. There are finite resources and it comes to a decision on where the money would be better spent. A line wil be drawn, the question is where. Armstrong (and others) would be liable for criminal offences in France (sporting fraud) - I wonder if they could get an extradition from the US?
"By creating we think. By living we learn" - Patrick Geddes

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #39 on: September 03, 2012, 05:14:33 pm »
Start with the biggest fish and keep working down the various groups until the money runs out or the desire to pursue the small fry dissipates. Armstrong/ Bruyneel/ UCI is the biggest fish and has to be taken out first, otherwise any subsequent prosecutions will just be for show.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

RJ

  • Droll rat
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #40 on: September 03, 2012, 05:58:47 pm »
Who cares who wins won?

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #41 on: September 03, 2012, 06:00:59 pm »
One of the unusual things about cycling is that dopers like Millar (D), Contador et al can serve a ban and come back, having had the benefit of drugs in reaching a particular level of training and muscular development.

Either make the ban for life, or prohibit them from going near anything pedal-operated while it is in force, to ensure all the training benefit is undone.
Never tell me the odds.

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #42 on: September 03, 2012, 06:17:45 pm »
I set the voting up so that you can vote multiple times. I thought it would be appropriate that the result could be influenced by the unscrupulous. Obviously there might be a record of those multiple votes somewhere, and the results might be overturned in the light of an altered ethical framework.

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #43 on: September 03, 2012, 06:34:37 pm »
It is even more appropriate that the poll winner is influenced by the organisation's approach. The result may be different if 'nobody' was an option.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Rig of Jarkness

  • An Englishman abroad
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #44 on: September 03, 2012, 06:52:43 pm »
Another thing that I find myself pondering is the moral difference between raising your oxygen carrying capacity through injections of EPO and achieving the same by training at altitude for a few weeks.  Why is one acceptable but not the other ?
Aero but not dynamic

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #45 on: September 03, 2012, 07:16:58 pm »
Another thing that I find myself pondering is the moral difference between raising your oxygen carrying capacity through injections of EPO and achieving the same by training at altitude for a few weeks.  Why is one acceptable but not the other ?
The clue's in the word I highlighted.
Never tell me the odds.

Rig of Jarkness

  • An Englishman abroad
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #46 on: September 03, 2012, 07:29:05 pm »
Those taking EPO still have to train.
Aero but not dynamic

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #47 on: September 03, 2012, 07:45:38 pm »
I suppose that there is authenticity in the capacity of the athlete being the result of an unmodified physiological response to the loads placed on them. Coaching will obviously play a big part. Sky have a team doctor with experience at Rabobank during the Rasmussen era. There's no point in raising red blood cell counts through altitude training and other physiological means if you don't have someone who knows how to get the results at the next stage.
I'm interested in the mind games, so Sky's team psychiatrist fascinates me. http://www.teamsky.com/profile/0,27291,17543_6638147,00.html
The British Psychological society had a short article on how to win the Tour.
http://www.bps.org.uk/news/road-paris-long-how-win-tour-de-france
I was interested to know what Alastair Campbell had to say about Lance.
http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blog/2012/08/26/hard-not-to-like-lance-armstrong-and-i-still-want-to-believe-but-his-giving-up-made-it-harder/
Quote
At the time, his greatest challenger was Jan Ullrich. Armstrong admitted that the big German kept him awake at night. I asked him what was the bigger fear: that he might die, on being told he had testicular cancer, or that Ullrich might beat him?
 And that was when he gave me what I call the Roy Keane death stare, and said those remarkable words: “losing and dying. It’s the same thing.” I asked if he really meant that. He said he did, and I think I believed him. I have quoted it many times since, not least in political campaigns, as the ultimate in a winning mindset.

Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #48 on: September 03, 2012, 07:49:46 pm »
I set the voting up so that you can vote multiple times. I thought it would be appropriate that the result could be influenced by the unscrupulous. Obviously there might be a record of those multiple votes somewhere, and the results might be overturned in the light of an altered ethical framework.

Brilliant sense of humour!

slohill

  • still at it
Re: Who won the Tour de France from 1999 to 2005
« Reply #49 on: September 04, 2012, 07:50:35 am »
Chris Boardman---famously clean.
Organiser of   "Tour of Berwyns" & Panorama Prospect (June 6 2020 provisional)