Dopers suck

[fandacious]

The big races with big sponsors can ban these guys. However , smaller races with smaller sponsors start this and soon the races numbers will dwindle and those sponsors will disappear and be lost forever. Only thing that suffers is cycling. One day people will wake up and see that this sport goes hand in hand with doping. Like a lot of other sports in this age.

 

so we should all just sit back and accept the fact that doping is part of the sport. Should we give LA his 7 tdf titles back as well?

 

The problem with life bans based purely on a single positive test is that false positives do happen. Rare, but not non existant. There was even a comment in the statement regarding the Bloem lab that one of the aspects in the failed lab cert was false positives.

 

I am all for banning organised dopers from sport, never mind just races, like Lance but a once off lab result is not reliable enough.

 

thats why theres a B sample. Also, how exactly do you think testing is done? In someones backyard? There are strict controls and protocols in place. Its not some lucky guess.

 

Fand are you adding Daryl Impey to your list? Or should we not open that discussion?

Only if you get caught and were punished should you be on the list?

 

 

 

He's not a sanctioned doper...

[Hennie VR]

 those who purposefully cross the white line so they can ride others into the gutter...

 

YES PLEASE!!!! Ban them, Ban them all.

Hate it when I drop because I had to sit in the gutter.       

[(Deon)]

Listed on your site as dirty?

 

16.2 Any athletes banned from other races due to doping will not be allowed to race at Gravel & Grape.

[fandacious]

Listed on your site as dirty?

 

16.2 Any athletes banned from other races due to doping will not be allowed to race at Gravel & Grape.

thanks!

[Eldron]

Just a wee reminder of the doper mentality we're dealing with: http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/di-luca-i-still-consider-myself-the-winner-of-the-2007-giro-ditalia/

 

"I believe I deserved to win all the races I did, including the 2007 Giro d'Italia and I don't intend to give them up," Di Luca told Cyclingnews defiantly.

 

"If I hadn't doped, I would never have won," Di Luca claims at one point in the book. "Doping improves your performance between 5 and 7 per cent, and maybe 10 to 12 per cent when you are in a peak shape. Doping isn't addictive but it's an instrument of power: whoever wins attracts the money; for themselves, the team and the sponsors.

 

I only talk about my doping and not what other riders did because I will never name other riders. I'm not a snitch.

 

"The best rider always wins the big races. Doping doesn't make enough of a difference to help a domestique win a Grand Tour. Perhaps a hidden motor does but doping doesn't. The campione always wins and I'm convinced that if there hadn't been any doping going on, I'd have won more. I think Armstrong would have won less Tours. He had a unique position of power and without it perhaps he would have three or four Tours. I don't think he would have won seven Tours."

 

This dude is proper confused!

[Andrew Steer]

Sjoe... taking this a little too far don't you think Fand?

 

http://doperssuck.co.za/dirty-races/

 

"Dirty races" because they are following the rule of the law? You might be getting some more lawyers letters. You just can't force races to take your stance

 

You know how I feel about Dopers, but I think you're going about this the wrong way.

Listing the dopers is a good start - wall of shame etc But chasing after race organisers? Rather just support the ones who do take a firmer stance

 

My 2cents

[Eldron]

Sjoe... taking this a little too far don't you think Fand?

 

http://doperssuck.co.za/dirty-races/

 

"Dirty races" because they are following the rule of the law? You might be getting some more lawyers letters. You just can't force races to take your stance

 

You know how I feel about Dopers, but I think you're going about this the wrong way.

Listing the dopers is a good start - wall of shame etc But chasing after race organisers? Rather just support the ones who do take a firmer stance

 

My 2cents

 

 

Check the site again Andrew - already been brought up and changed

[Pure Savage]

The joke is that the official bans etc are apparently not working, there are new generation of riders getting busted, therefore if people actually care about the health of young athletes then imposing stricter actions is the only way around it. Sponsors are not there because of one or two good riders, they are there to get exposure from the masses.

 

Hopefully if the dopers sponsor does not get any entries they give the sponsorship to a rider that is not a doper.

 

The sport will not die if a few dopers are not allowed to compete. (Rolls eyes)

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Patchelicious]

List the races that have openly stated they wont allow dopers as "Awesome Races". These races should be applauded for their stance and supported.

 

Then list the "Wall of Shame" - Doper. We can use this list to check if these guys are at the races that we do. Eg: This weekend I saw that BS did the MD90, not competively but he did it, not sure how I feel about this as he wasnt "racing". Also when BMS got 2nd, I immediately checked to see if Austin Steyn was riding for them. He wasnt. It was only because of this list that I checked, so it does have a use.

 

Listing race organisers who have not responded might be a bit agressive for the cause, and support could be lost, or worse, the moral high ground and credibility could be lost if a race is incorrectly branded "dirty".

[Andrew Steer]

Check the site again Andrew - already been brought up and changed

 

URL is still that though... and the sentiment is still pretty much the same. Praise the races that come on board, have a cool mission statement etc, encourage other races to take this stance, but you can't really list races (in a negative light) that aren't as passionate about this as we are? Think Bike Pure etc

 

This has potential, and I like the sentiment, but going vigilante style after every race organiser is not the way forward in my view...

[Andrew Steer]

List the races that have openly stated they wont allow dopers as "Awesome Races". These races should be applauded for their stance and supported.

 

Then list the "Wall of Shame" - Doper. We can use this list to check if these guys are at the races that we do. Eg: This weekend I saw that BS did the MD90, not competively but he did it, not sure how I feel about this as he wasnt "racing". Also when BMS got 2nd, I immediately checked to see if Austin Steyn was riding for them. He wasnt. It was only because of this list that I checked, so it does have a use.

 

Listing race organisers who have not responded might be a bit agressive for the cause, and support could be lost, or worse, the moral high ground and credibility could be lost if a race is incorrectly branded "dirty".

 

Reckon we're on the same page here 

[Patchelicious]

URL is still that though... and the sentiment is still pretty much the same. Praise the races that come on board, have a cool mission statement etc, encourage other races to take this stance, but you can't really list races (in a negative light) that aren't as passionate about this as we are? Think Bike Pure etc

 

This has potential, and I like the sentiment, but going vigilante style after every race organiser is not the way forward in my view...

I agree with you very much.

 

If you want to actually make a change and keep support, sometimes a slightly more diplomatic approach is better.

[fandacious]

URL is still that though... and the sentiment is still pretty much the same. Praise the races that come on board, have a cool mission statement etc, encourage other races to take this stance, but you can't really list races (in a negative light) that aren't as passionate about this as we are? Think Bike Pure etc

 

This has potential, and I like the sentiment, but going vigilante style after every race organiser is not the way forward in my view...

 

Thanks for your input on this - We've changed the URL

[fandacious]

Then you have races like Ride The Berg, who openly attacked Stu Rawlinson, then said on the phone to me and stu that that if we had actually bothered to read their website we would see clearly they dont condone dopers riding their races. I trawled their websites and never found anything. Then after that I was sms'd this message :

 

"Ridetheberg Statement going up today. 

Ridetheberg is a strong proponent of clean and drug-free sport.

As such, in line with the major MTB races in South Africa, we have adopted the policy that any rider, who is properly charged and convicted by the relevant cycling authorities of cheating by way of doping from 1 January 2016 going forward, will not be permitted to participate in any Ridetheberg events.

In addition, while all sport is by definition competitive, we are taking steps to completely dis-incentivize any form of cheating at Ridetheberg by doing away with participant prize money and re-allocating same to the local communities that are intended to be the primary beneficiaries of the event.

Ridetheberg also takes the position that we live and ride in a country that is governed by democratic principles and rule of law, and as such we are also strong proponents of equality and fairness, and we condemn any and all efforts to introduce an environment of arbitrary, inconsistent and extra-legal enforcement and justice in our sport. We believe that we all strive towards common goals, and welcome concerned riders to engage with the Race Organisers and/or the regulatory authorities further on the subject.

Ridetheberg is about Mountain Biking for the joy of riding and the love of the trails. "

 

Only to see this posted on twitter a short while ago - 

 

 

are they confused?

 

If Cape epic can draw a line in the sand and say "No one sanctioned after 1 jan 2012 can ride our race", I cant see why every other piss willy race needs to justify their decisions to let cheats ride the race.

 

 

Edited May 9, 2016 by fandacious

[Gen]

Why isn't Berg and Bush on your awesome list.. they have taken the same stance as the other awesome races.?

 

Maybe you just haven't updated your website..

Edited May 9, 2016 by Gen

[fandacious]

Why isn't Berg and Bush on your awesome list.. they have taken the same stance as the other awesome races.?

 

Maybe you just haven't updated your website..

 

awesome! would love to add them!

 

can you get me a link to this in their t&c's ?