hilarious
Isn't it hilarious that some guy did an interview with Pedro Delgado and
that they talked about the problems of doping in cycling...but never discussed the fact that Deldopa tested positive for probenecid in the '88 Tour de France? http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11233.0.html http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11235.0.html Thanks, Magilla |
hilarious
MagillaGorilla wrote:
Isn't it hilarious that some guy did an interview with Pedro Delgado and that they talked about the problems of doping in cycling...but never discussed the fact that Deldopa tested positive for probenecid in the '88 Tour de France? http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11233.0.html http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11235.0.html Thanks, Magilla It does seem that people were more inclined to forgive and forget even that recently. There wasn't a presumption of innocence, but if my failing memory serves even the American press seemed to want him to be reinstated. Don't know if it would have been different in '89 when Lemond was back. Steve -- Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001 |
hilarious
Delgado was a great rider duing his time. But Delgado's doping record
will taint his comments about drugs. Delgado comes across as a apologist for dopers. I think that Delgado does make some good points. Certain substances should be allowed if they are used for medicinal purposes. Naturally a use would have to be by prescription and reported to the UCI. The medical condition would be to be verified by a UCI appointed doctor as well. Delgado is right when he says that riders don't race enough. It's understandable that a rider like Lance cut back his spring schedule. But there is no reason why he did not race more in the fall. Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote: MagillaGorilla wrote: Isn't it hilarious that some guy did an interview with Pedro Delgado and that they talked about the problems of doping in cycling...but never discussed the fact that Deldopa tested positive for probenecid in the '88 Tour de France? http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11233.0.html http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11235.0.html Thanks, Magilla It does seem that people were more inclined to forgive and forget even that recently. There wasn't a presumption of innocence, but if my failing memory serves even the American press seemed to want him to be reinstated. Don't know if it would have been different in '89 when Lemond was back. Steve -- Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS http://www.dentaltwins.com Brooklyn, NY 718-258-5001 |
hilarious
|
hilarious
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:08:59 -0500, MagillaGorilla
wrote: wrote: Delgado was a great rider duing his time. But Delgado's doping record will taint his comments about drugs. Delgado comes across as a apologist for dopers. His name is actually Deldopa. I think that Delgado does make some good points. Certain substances should be allowed if they are used for medicinal purposes. Naturally a use would have to be by prescription and reported to the UCI. The medical condition would be to be verified by a UCI appointed doctor as well. Dude, are you lucid? TUE's are a loophole for using bannned substances and WADA is trying to close them every year (asthma, etc.). What is it, like 60% of pro cyclists claim to have diagnosable asthma. Since when does a prescription by a medical doctor mean the purpose of its use is not performance enhancing? Since when does the fact that something is performance enhancing mean that it shouldn't be prescribed. Guys who run a lot of air through their lungs tend to get asthma. Ron Also, the UCI isn't in the habit of verifying medical conditions. WADA sets the doping code and banned list and TUE's, not the UCI. Any doctor the UCI would hire is probably a part of the omerta anyway. They give out TUE's in Europe like candy on Halloween. Delgado is right when he says that riders don't race enough. It's understandable that a rider like Lance cut back his spring schedule. But there is no reason why he did not race more in the fall. Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote: Yeah, well in Deldopa's day, the racing wasn't as hard as it is today (according to LeMond it was 30% easier). And riders are a lot smarter today and know it's not possible to peak year round. Top riders and teams don't get paid to get 67th in a lot of races. So why ride on a average level for the entire season rather than peak for a few events so you have a better chance of winning one, as opposed to getting 46th in a lot? **** Deldopa. Deldopa needs to answer 2 questions - why was he taking probencid in the '88 Tour and what steroids was he trying to mask. And why should we take advice from a guy who shows up late to a time trial in a Grand Tour? At least Landis had a good excuse. Thanks, Magilla |
hilarious
RonSonic wrote:
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 00:08:59 -0500, MagillaGorilla wrote: wrote: Delgado was a great rider duing his time. But Delgado's doping record will taint his comments about drugs. Delgado comes across as a apologist for dopers. His name is actually Deldopa. I think that Delgado does make some good points. Certain substances should be allowed if they are used for medicinal purposes. Naturally a use would have to be by prescription and reported to the UCI. The medical condition would be to be verified by a UCI appointed doctor as well. Dude, are you lucid? TUE's are a loophole for using bannned substances and WADA is trying to close them every year (asthma, etc.). What is it, like 60% of pro cyclists claim to have diagnosable asthma. Since when does a prescription by a medical doctor mean the purpose of its use is not performance enhancing? Since when does the fact that something is performance enhancing mean that it shouldn't be prescribed. Why? Because every athlete in the world will then be claiming to their doctor that they suffer from ailment "X", as has already occurred with asthma. In most cases doctors diagnose patients with whatever they want just to get them out of the room. Stop being so idealistic. Magilla |
hilarious
MagillaGorilla wrote: wrote: Delgado was a great rider duing his time. But Delgado's doping record will taint his comments about drugs. Delgado comes across as a apologist for dopers. His name is actually Deldopa. I think that Delgado does make some good points. Certain substances should be allowed if they are used for medicinal purposes. Naturally a use would have to be by prescription and reported to the UCI. The medical condition would be to be verified by a UCI appointed doctor as well. WADA or UCI would appoint a doctor and the team would then be responsible for the medical costs. Dude, are you lucid? TUE's are a loophole for using bannned substances and WADA is trying to close them every year (asthma, etc.). What is it, like 60% of pro cyclists claim to have diagnosable asthma. Since when does a prescription by a medical doctor mean the purpose of its use is not performance enhancing? Also, the UCI isn't in the habit of verifying medical conditions. WADA sets the doping code and banned list and TUE's, not the UCI. Any doctor the UCI would hire is probably a part of the omerta anyway. They give out TUE's in Europe like candy on Halloween. Delgado is right when he says that riders don't race enough. It's understandable that a rider like Lance cut back his spring schedule. But there is no reason why he did not race more in the fall. Mark & Steven Bornfeld wrote: I agree that pro cycling has become much harder. But as I said before it's hard to explain how a rider peaks for the TDF and then does not enter any races for the rest of the season. I sometimes wonder if the peaking has not become to predominant in training. If there is any scientific studies on peaking I would be most interested...?? Yeah, well in Deldopa's day, the racing wasn't as hard as it is today (according to LeMond it was 30% easier). And riders are a lot smarter today and know it's not possible to peak year round. Top riders and teams don't get paid to get 67th in a lot of races. So why ride on a average level for the entire season rather than peak for a few events so you have a better chance of winning one, as opposed to getting 46th in a lot? **** Deldopa. Deldopa needs to answer 2 questions - why was he taking probencid in the '88 Tour and what steroids was he trying to mask. And why should we take advice from a guy who shows up late to a time trial in a Grand Tour? At least Landis had a good excuse. Thanks, Magilla |
hilarious
|
hilarious
|
hilarious
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com