Valverde.......A Worthy Winner............Poll

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
As we know Valverde won the Worlds road champ on sunday.
But Woods & Bardet were on the podium...............
Dumoulin was great as usual, shame about 4th.

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/raci ... ast-395973

[pjclinch]

Dumoulin was great as usual, shame about 4th.

Aye, it's been a year of "so close yet still so far" for TD. A great rider, and even without my national-bias-through-marriage I'd be a big fan.
Hup Tom!

Pete.

[Eman Resu]

Why the (Banned 2008-10 appx)? It seems to imply that even though a person serves a punishment (perhaps, in any sphere of life) they are still not absolved. I thought that justice is served in the punishment unless, of course, the common consensus is that no crime can ever be forgiven.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,

Why the (Banned 2008-10 appx)? It seems to imply that even though a person serves a punishment (perhaps, in any sphere of life) they are still not absolved. I thought that justice is served in the punishment unless, of course, the common consensus is that no crime can ever be forgiven.

Well Like Woods And Bardet who as so far not been done for any drugging?
If you were them would you be happy on the podium under Valverde.
Its always going to be a bit sour.

EPO is undetectable after 3 days in the body, not so if you transfuse which is how Valverde got done.
Based on that I would of thought that its quite easy to use the stuff for training etc and we will never know the extent of doping even today in cycling.

OK so you are happy to compete against someone who has been banned in the past.
Hence my poll, its anonymous, so I hoped that more would vote.
Ah I see we have 6

[RickH]

EPO is undetectable after 3 days in the body, not so if you transfuse which is how Valverde got done.
Based on that I would of thought that its quite easy to use the stuff for training etc and we will never know the extent of doping even today in cycling.

Hence the random out of competition testing & the requirement for all top level competitors to have a daily whereabouts notifications so testers can appear on any day. And they can get into trouble - an automatic ban - if they aren't there when the testers show up (I think they are allowed one "miss" in 12 months) .

[Cyril Haearn]

You offered several answers, Plus One

I have made my polls valid for a long time, several weeks, in the hope of getting statistically valid results

[reohn2]

Valverde is a great rider a great tactician and a worthy champion.
Yes he was banned for drug taking and served his sentence,after which he was given his licence back.
Since then he's been clean.
A worthy champion end of.

[mjr]

Valverde is a great rider a great tactician and a worthy champion.
Yes he was banned for drug taking and served his sentence,after which he was given his licence back.
Since then he's been clean.
A worthy champion end of.

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

[Cyril Haearn]

Valverde is a great rider a great tactician and a worthy champion.
Yes he was banned for drug taking and served his sentence,after which he was given his licence back.
Since then he's been clean.
A worthy champion end of.

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

Should doping be treated differently from other crimes? When one has served the punishment, is the crime still relevant? Should he speak against doping, or not?

[reohn2]

Valverde is a great rider a great tactician and a worthy champion.
Yes he was banned for drug taking and served his sentence,after which he was given his licence back.
Since then he's been clean.
A worthy champion end of.

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

He served his time,that's all that matters.

[pjclinch]

Valverde is a great rider a great tactician and a worthy champion.
Yes he was banned for drug taking and served his sentence,after which he was given his licence back.
Since then he's been clean.
A worthy champion end of.

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

He served his time,that's all that matters.

It's a bit more complicated than that, and different people will have different ethical and moral positions on it. Read Nicole Cooke's "Breakaway" and it's pretty clear she hasn't have the time of day for him, for example, and she's also got some very good personal and professional reasons for that. Myself, I don't see it nearly so black and white.

FWIW I think he's a worthy champion because he's an excellent rider and won the race by being the best, but I'd also prefer it if he'd had the cojones to be open and apparently sorry about cheating in the past. David Millar's far from perfect, but I have a fair degree of respect for him embracing that and doing something with it.

Pete.

[mjr]

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

Should doping be treated differently from other crimes? When one has served the punishment, is the crime still relevant? Should he speak against doping, or not?

Doping is already treated differently from other crimes in that they lose their racing licence as well as whatever criminal charges may apply (which vary by country). There are also some studies suggesting that dopers are permanently enhanced a little by doping, which is a can of worms which no-one seems keen to look into too deeply. Say a rider can have 20 years at the top and risking sacrificing 2 years early on for more success in the last 10 starts to seem like a rational transaction, if you can ignore the health risks of unnecessary drugs.

I think it's a type of fraud, which is a crime which I feel is still relevant if the perpetrator is unrepentant. Valverde isn't exactly repentant in one of the few interviews in recent years touching on doping that he seems not to have ended or changed subject on.

Yes, he should speak against doping and ideally shop the others involved in his incident. Especially now, most of them involved a decade ago have probably retired, so what has he got to lose if he's not doing it any more? But even without that, a clearer anti-doping stance would be better.

[pjclinch]

I think it's a type of fraud, which is a crime which I feel is still relevant if the perpetrator is unrepentant. Valverde isn't exactly repentant in one of the few interviews in recent years touching on doping that he seems not to have ended or changed subject on.

Yes, he should speak against doping and ideally shop the others involved in his incident. Especially now, most of them involved a decade ago have probably retired, so what has he got to lose if he's not doing it any more? But even without that, a clearer anti-doping stance would be better.

In the Vuelta coverage Gary Imlach provided a typical deadpan to this general effect while introducing a stage, pointing out that AV was very popular in Spain but perhaps less popular in countries where they like their ex-dopers to be a little more repentant.

I'd appreciate him more as a person if he did that, and it would be good for the sport IMHO. Also IMHO a World Champion is, whether they like it or not, an ambassador for the sport and that subjects someone in a stripy jumper to a higher level of scrutiny.

Pete.

[reohn2]

He's unrepentant and ends interviews that ask about his doping IIRC... which is what calls his worthiness into question.

It's his prerogative,I'm happy that he was caught,banned and has learned his lesson and returned to racing.
If anyone doubts his character then all I ask is for them to watch the crash in last year's TdeF prolog,and his injuries sustained at his age in his career,and his results this year.
The man is a legend.
YVMV mine won't

EDIT, Valverde isn't alone in not wanting to discuss doping,many people still involved in the sport will refer to doping only obliquely or refer to it as a dark time.
When Valverde was found doping he wasn't alone by a long shot,but was one of those caught in the act.That time is now hopefully past but I won't be holding my breath.
One thing's for sure though,if Valverde is still doping he's walking a very fine line and has LA's legacy hanging over him,and likewise anyone else.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/late ... eam-396414

"After Landis blew the whistle on Armstrong in 2010, Armstrong paid $5million to the government in a settlement earlier this year.

As the person who first filed the lawsuit back in 2010, Landis was eligible for up to 25 per cent of the payout."