RBR people with guts.

From:
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/7454.0.html

Agree with DeCanio? Then don't stay anonymous
Editor:
Thank you for printing this (see "Ofoto fires DeCanio over web sites").


I am a Matt DeCanio fan; I don't always agree with his communicative
skills and tactics, but I am "on his side." I am disappointed to read
that the racing contract hangs in the balance.

When you add this snip to the story . . .


"Matt's pretty confrontational and makes a lot of people angry," one
high-profile professional said, asking to remain anonymous, "but
there's a lot of truth in what he writes on his Web sites."

.. . . it makes me furious that this sport continues to be so tethered
to the drug culture. Where are the guts that allow a rider to address
your story and agree with Matt, yet hide behind the "anonymous source"
mask?

Richard Sachs
Chester, Connecticut



Got to give Mr. Sachs credit for having the guts to speak up, AND put
his name to it. For someone doing what he does it's probably not the
best thing for short term business to take shots at pro racers and the
people running things.
Of course I agree with him and really respect how he conducts himself
and how his team runs. I'm sure that there are a ****load of racers who
know exactly what some of their fellow competitors are taking and then
don't do anything but bitch about it privately. They're gutless and are
just as big a part of the problem. Maybe a lot of this **** is being
reported, and nothing is happening, but I don't think that would've
stayed quiet if it was happening. It's time for pro riders here who've
had enough of this **** to speak up, volunteer to be tested, and dime
out people they think are doping. Yeah it could develop into something
of a witchunt, but I don't think that having to submit to testing is
too big a price to pay for having a USPRO license. Having to do it
would also be some payback for ignoring the problem for so long.
At least Richie is a standup guy, unlike a certain pro around here and
quite a few other pros out there too.
Bill C

On 25 Jan 2005 10:34:50 -0800, "Bill C" wrote:


Got to give Mr. Sachs credit for having the guts to speak up, AND put
his name to it. For someone doing what he does it's probably not the
best thing for short term business to take shots at pro racers and the
people running things.
Of course I agree with him and really respect how he conducts himself
and how his team runs. I'm sure that there are a ****load of racers who
know exactly what some of their fellow competitors are taking and then
don't do anything but bitch about it privately. They're gutless and are
just as big a part of the problem.

I'm guessing that Mr. Sachs won't lose much business. Unless an
opinion threatens someone directly, I can't see any real
ramifications, and his isn't a direct threat to anyone specific.

As to racers that don't report others being as big a part of the
problem, I'm not sure who the 'big as' is in reference, but I'll
probably disagree regardless.

For one thing, it is unlikely to be a monolithic response stemming
from either conspiracy or gutlessness. Some have too many other
priorities. Some are gutless. Some probably figure most of the drug
takers are doing it in a lame manner and aren't winning anyway. Some
don't want the hassle for what isn't a major issue for them. Some may
think that maybe until the USAC starts serious testing, why should
they be the frontrunner. Maybe some think the whole USAC drug process
lacks credibility, what with some still racing while others get sat
down.

If the USAC crowd seem to spend their time floating around the issue
and hoping and waiting for some mandated external group to do the
heavy lifting for them, why SHOULD an individual racer take it upon
themself to do it?

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Curtis L. Russell wrote:
down.

If the USAC crowd seem to spend their time floating around the issue
and hoping and waiting for some mandated external group to do the
heavy lifting for them, why SHOULD an individual racer take it upon
themself to do it?

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

I see it as being along the same lines as baseball. The league was not
going to be able to do anything, and didn't really want to IMO, because
of the opposition from the players and their union. It finally took
enough clean players getting ****ed off enough to oppose their own
union to get at least some action through on doping. In cycling the
effect of drugs is much more immediate in relationship to the results
than in a "team" sport so I would think that it would benefit the
racers even more to speak out. Unfortunately the money issue hasn't hit
cycling the way it looked like it was going to hit baseball. I think
they were terrified of losing tens of millions of dollars in
advertising and endorsements so they did something. That is never going
to a factor in cycling, especially here as far as I can tell. There
just aren't that many companies putting up that kind of money here, and
the ones that have seem to have gone along with ignoring the problem.
The only thing that I can see that would kill pro cycling here would be
Lance getting caught red-handed. If that happens I don't think we'll be
able to raise enough sponsorship to support much more than the local
parking lot crit let alone major events.
The problem is that almost nobody is taking a real stand, and there
are a lot of serious questions about the anti-doping system and the way
it's run here. Plenty of blame to go around, but somebody needs to step
up, or we just need to class cycling with bodybuilding and pro
wrestling and leave it at that.
Bill C

Bill C wrote:

I see it as being along the same lines as baseball. The league was
not
going to be able to do anything, and didn't really want to IMO,
because
of the opposition from the players and their union. It finally took
enough clean players getting ****ed off enough to oppose their own
union to get at least some action through on doping. In cycling the
effect of drugs is much more immediate in relationship to the results
than in a "team" sport so I would think that it would benefit the
racers even more to speak out. Unfortunately the money issue hasn't
hit
cycling the way it looked like it was going to hit baseball. I think
they were terrified of losing tens of millions of dollars in
advertising and endorsements so they did something.


snip



Jesus Christ.

You've really got your head up your ass. The drug testing in cycling is
100 times more rigorous than that of baseball. For instance, baseball
doesn't even test for amphetamines and it's the most widely abused
drug.

From:
http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/8096308

NEW YORK -- Amphetamines were untouched by baseball's new
drug-testing agreement, with the issue left for the sport's medical
advisers to study.
Some say amphetamine use is more widespread than steroid use in a sport
when players are ground down by playing 162 games over 183 days during
the regular season, with constant travel and all-night flights leaving
many weary.

"Amphetamines, better known as 'greenies,' have a long tradition in
baseball," Dr. Gary Wadler of the World Anti-Doping Agency said after
baseball announced its new deal Thursday.
snipend



thanks,

K. Gringioni.

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Jesus Christ.

You've really got your head up your ass. The drug testing in cycling
is
100 times more rigorous than that of baseball. For instance, baseball
doesn't even test for amphetamines and it's the most widely abused
drug.



thanks,

K. Gringioni.

I know that. But if cyclists had a union as strong as the MLBPA I have
real questions about what testing would look like. The only reason that
baseball hase any testing at all is that the players chose to push for
it. If it was left up to the union there would have been absolutely no
change. I don't care what the League or Washington grandstanders said,
if the Union continued to block it, that was going to be it.
I don't think baseball's system is going to do **** in reality, but
the fact that players actually spoke up against dopers, and their own
union to make at least something happen is what I'm saying we need to
happen if cycling is ever going to be cleaned up. It's never going to
happen from the outside and it'll never be cleaned up completely. I do
think that it could be a lot cleaner, especially on the US level where
the money for sophisticated designer drugs, treatments, programs is a
lot less available. That's one reason I really think that high level
athletes in major sports get caught so rarely. They have more than
enough money, and access to people with the latest research that are
happy to take their money to beat the testing system.
This is one point where I agree with Brian. If Lance is, or was doping
you can be absolutely sure that he was getting the very best medical,
and scientific care that ****loads of money could buy to protect his
health as much as possible and avoid detection. That is going to make
it incredibly hard to come up with a smoking gun if there is one.
Bill C

Kurgan Gringioni wrote:



Jesus Christ.

You've really got your head up your ass. The drug testing in cycling
is
100 times more rigorous than that of baseball. For instance, baseball
doesn't even test for amphetamines and it's the most widely abused
drug.

From:
http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/8096308

NEW YORK -- Amphetamines were untouched by baseball's new
drug-testing agreement, with the issue left for the sport's medical
advisers to study.
Some say amphetamine use is more widespread than steroid use in a
sport
when players are ground down by playing 162 games over 183 days
during
the regular season, with constant travel and all-night flights
leaving
many weary.

"Amphetamines, better known as 'greenies,' have a long tradition in
baseball," Dr. Gary Wadler of the World Anti-Doping Agency said after
baseball announced its new deal Thursday.
snipend



thanks,

K. Gringioni.

I think that the motion in baseball from what they had to the position
now is much more significant than what is going on in cycling. I still
think the new policy in baseball is going to be ineffective, unless the
players who are ****ed off and had the guts to challenge their own
union start reporting people for doping. I think that it's going to
turn out to be cosmetic, but can you show me a rider revolt that led to
better anti-doping in cycling? You've got a handfull of people trying
to make it happen, but they seem to be getting slapped down by their
fellow riders. I've seen some of the **** Justin has had to take. Not
for doping, but for speaking out afterwards. We ran into him after GMBC
on the way home and let him know that we appreciated his speaking out
and didn't think it was right that he was taking so much ****.
I do agree with Brian that it's going to take a miracle to catch Lance
red-handed if he is doping. Lance has the resources and smarts to get
the newest designer stuff, and best advice on how to use it if he
wanted to. It's the same thing in other major sports, when mediocre
players are making 7 or 8 mil a year they can afford to stay ahead of
the testing such as it is. I think that there is hope for making US pro
cycling pretty clean because the cost/benefit really isn't there, and
the money to stay ahead of the testing is a lot rarer. This would also
become a lot tougher to do if riders were stepping up and pointing out
people for testing.
Relatively cycling is in a much better position to clean things up
domestically, but it's going to have to come from the riders or it's
going to like just like the wider "war on drugs" which has been a
dismal failure at best, as you've pointed out numerous times.
I would think that racers would have more motivation to speak out
since doping in cycling has a much more immediate effect on overall
results than in just about any other sport here.
Bill C

On 25 Jan 2005 11:47:39 -0800, "Bill C" wrote:

That is never going
to a factor in cycling, especially here as far as I can tell. There
just aren't that many companies putting up that kind of money here, and
the ones that have seem to have gone along with ignoring the problem.
The only thing that I can see that would kill pro cycling here would be
Lance getting caught red-handed. If that happens I don't think we'll be
able to raise enough sponsorship to support much more than the local
parking lot crit let alone major events.
The problem is that almost nobody is taking a real stand, and there
are a lot of serious questions about the anti-doping system and the way
it's run here. Plenty of blame to go around, but somebody needs to step
up, or we just need to class cycling with bodybuilding and pro
wrestling and leave it at that.

I think what they were afraid of in the environmental sense was the
U.S. government stepping in and making the waters real muddy. The
micro issue that made it all possible, considering the union has no
problem with shutting down the business, was that there were more
players that wanted testing than players that didn't. Also the reason
IMO that the testing is in such a narrow band.

Bicycle racing is worse than hockey. The number that know about pro
racing is small and the number that will miss it far fewer. Killing
pro racing would be, at best, gratuitous. At best, merciful and the
rest of us can spend more time riding our bikes in summer. IMO
wouldn't be a blip on the amateur and semi-amateur scene.

'Plenty of blame to go around' is like 'forgotten more than most
people have ever learned' for me. I'm never sure that either survives
much scrutiny. Its a great phrase for those that aren't doing their
job, so I'm sure at some point we'll hear it used by USAC. The real
point is that the blame is not something to be passed around, but that
the real responsibility lies with USAC IMO. Bike racers are paid to
race. Someone else is paid to administer and program.

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

Bill C wrote:
Kurgan Gringioni wrote:
Jesus Christ.

You've really got your head up your ass. The drug testing in
cycling
is
100 times more rigorous than that of baseball. For instance,
baseball
doesn't even test for amphetamines and it's the most widely abused
drug.



thanks,

K. Gringioni.

I know that. But if cyclists had a union as strong as the MLBPA I
have
real questions about what testing would look like. The only reason
that
baseball hase any testing at all is that the players chose to push
for
it.


snip



Dumbass -

Get your facts straight.

The OWNERS pushed for it and Donald Fehr (head of the players' union)
nixed it. In the last negotiation of the Collective Bargaining
Agreement, all they got was some preseason testing.

The only reason the players finally gave in (and dumbasses like you are
trying to give them credit for it) is Senator John McCain was
threatening to make the non-testing an issue in the US Senate.
Baseball's antitrust exemption was at stake and the union caved in.

Do not give the players credit for that. They are the ones who resist
the most. The owners want it. If you don't believe me, I'll post links.
thanks,

K. Gringioni.

"Bill C" wrote in message
oups.com...
From:
http://www.velonews.com/news/fea/7454.0.html

I respect Richard as well. But I don't hand this problem over to the "drug
culture" as if that answered anything. I can't remember 70's heads using EPO
and Testosterone.

What I DO remember is the sort of people like Anquetil who thought that
racing straight wasn't any fun.

If you can't understand why Museeuw might dope to make a better impact near
retirement then you are too young to hold intelligent opinions.

If on the other hand, Museeuw doped his whole career to be the 'best' that
is something else altogether and it isn't "drug culture" at all.

You can't solve a problem if you don't understand the reasons that motivate
those with the problem. And you can't solve anything by simply crying about
it and unfortunately that's what DeCanio seems to be doing.

I wish Matt well but I do hope he grows up and realizes that the best we can
do is the BEST we can do. Screaming that isn't enough was something that
came from the drug culture.

"Kurgan Gringioni" wrote in message
ups.com...

Jesus Christ.

You've really got your head up your ass. The drug testing in cycling is
100 times more rigorous than that of baseball. For instance, baseball
doesn't even test for amphetamines and it's the most widely abused
drug.

Kudoes on a well written reply for a change.

From:
http://www.cbs.sportsline.com/mlb/story/8096308

NEW YORK -- Amphetamines were untouched by baseball's new
drug-testing agreement, with the issue left for the sport's medical
advisers to study.
Some say amphetamine use is more widespread than steroid use in a sport
when players are ground down by playing 162 games over 183 days during
the regular season, with constant travel and all-night flights leaving
many weary.

"Amphetamines, better known as 'greenies,' have a long tradition in
baseball," Dr. Gary Wadler of the World Anti-Doping Agency said after
baseball announced its new deal Thursday.
snipend

Henry, next time they zoom in on the dugout look at the players and see if
you can see the foremost symptom of someone on speed - they chew gum.