For those of you interested in professional cycling, please let me know
what you think of the following....

The sport of professional cycling continues to look like a Three
Stooges episode. The Operation Puerto situation causes the teams to ban
Jan Ullrich, Ivan Basso et al on the eve of the 2006 Tour. Now, Basso
is riding for Discovery, Ullrich is almost out of the woods (see
http://www.velonews.com/race/int/articles/11368.0.html) and the Tour
still doesn't have a confirmed winner as of December. Cool. I love this
sport! The champions are decided in the courtroom, not the road.

The biggest hypocrisy of all this to me is the fact that Lance
Armstrong was the subject of exactly the same things Ullrich and Basso
were/are. Innuendo, books, association with questionable doctors,
accusations, etc., but not one failed doping test. Yet, US
Postal/Discovery never suspended or disciplined him. Listen to Lance,
no failed tests equals a clean rider. By that test, Basso and Ullrich
should have ridden the Tour. Where else is guilt by association assumed?

Could the testing agencies be years behind the pharmaceutical
companies? Could Lance's multimillion dollar team of professionals for
his bikes, skinsuits, aerodynamics, training, etc. also include the
most knowledgable doctors and chemists? I think the answer is yes, just
as it is for about 90% of professional cyclists. Cycling has a rich
history of doping going back before 1900. Lance and today's current
crop of professionals are simply the ones the testing has caught up
with. There's an old adage that "you don't ride the Tour de France on
mineral water alone."

Peter Leyser

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com