I don't understand the "lack of credibility" comments about the tour

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.

Perhaps they'd TT better if they did.

On Jul 26, 1:58 am, Burt wrote:
I anything, the fact that cycling actually catches drug cheats and
kicks them out adds credibility to the race.


The testing was supposed to be a deterrent, not a roll of flypaper.

On Jul 26, 6:41 am, "steve" wrote:

1. Riders affect one anothers performances in a variety of ways. Pulling a
rider doesnt undo his effect on the race, so the end result is not the same
as if the rider had not started. It's like trying to re-score a baseball
game by eliminating one player, the runs he scored or batted-in, the outs,
put-outs, errors, etc. that he made. You cant undo the effect of his
participation, so the result itself is not credible. It was Rabo pulling
all day for a week. What if it had been Disco, Astana, or Lotto? How can a
winner be credibly declared now?

Getting busted is a road hazard, like puncturing,
crashing, eating a bad clam on the rest day, or getting
stung by a bee. Counterfactuals are just that,
counterfactual. What if Vino hadn't doped, but still
had got knocked over by the fan who put his flag in
Ivanov's wheel? Would we declare the winner not-credible?
The Tour is not and has never been solely a "true
athletic test" of the riders. That is why they
ride the Tour rather than doing a roller race while
hooked up to VO2 monitors.

Ben

2. The drug testing and appeals process itself is not seen as credible by
many people. The presumption of guilt, sloppy lab work, and press leaks all
give the impression of an unfair and out of control process.

All this leaves me (and I assume many others) feeling that the tour is no
longer a true athletic test of the participants.

in message .com, SLAVE
of THE STATE ') wrote:

On Jul 26, 6:41 am, "steve" wrote:

All this leaves me (and I assume many others) feeling that the tour is
no longer a true athletic test of the participants.

No true athlete would dope.

No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.

Maple syrup, dear boy. And a wee bit salt. /Never/ sugar.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; I can't work yanks out......
;; Why do they frown upon sex yet relish violence?
;; Deep Fried Lettuce

On 26-Jul-2007, smacked up and reeling, "
blindly formulated
the following incoherence:

1. Riders affect one anothers performances in a variety of ways.
Pulling a
rider doesnt undo his effect on the race, so the end result is not the
same
as if the rider had not started. It's like trying to re-score a
baseball
game by eliminating one player, the runs he scored or batted-in, the
outs,
put-outs, errors, etc. that he made. You cant undo the effect of his
participation, so the result itself is not credible. It was Rabo
pulling
all day for a week. What if it had been Disco, Astana, or Lotto? How
can a
winner be credibly declared now?

Getting busted is a road hazard, like puncturing,
crashing, eating a bad clam on the rest day, or getting
stung by a bee. Counterfactuals are just that,
counterfactual. What if Vino hadn't doped, but still
had got knocked over by the fan who put his flag in
Ivanov's wheel? Would we declare the winner not-credible?
The Tour is not and has never been solely a "true
athletic test" of the riders. That is why they
ride the Tour rather than doing a roller race while
hooked up to VO2 monitors.

I thought someone might make that point, but I dont think it holds water.
It's a stretch (at best) to consider getting DQed for cheating as a
legitimate part of the contest. I would say that, by definition, it is not.
OTOH, crashing etc. (even due to some idiot waving a flag) are legitimate
hazards and part of the somewhat crazy sport. Further, the strategy that is
so important in mass start racing is what makes road cycling so facinating.
I didnt mean to suggest that athletic competition should be a pure test of
physical ability. Few (if any) are, so roller races are not the ideal.

My point is that the contest is not made whole by ousting the cheaters
partway through. They leave a mark on the race that, due to their cheating,
is not a legitimate part of the contest. The result is thereby tainted.
That is quite different from the effects of random chance, road hazards,
strategy (of course), and all rider interaction within the rules.

steve
--
"The accused will now make a bogus statement."
James Joyce

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
No true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge.

Simon Brooke wrote:
Maple syrup, dear boy. And a wee bit salt. /Never/ sugar.

Save it for the haggis then.