Frankly, I don't know what to think about the 2007 Tour. We saw some great racing in both the Alps and the Pyrenees. Aggressive riding and attacks by all the favorites marked the march across the mountains and the rain-soaked first time trial produced more drama as well. But, in the end, I just don't feel like there was a real winner of this year's Tour. Don't get me wrong, Contador, Evans and Leipheimer rode really well and deserve plaudits for their efforts. They were clearly the strongest riders who finished the Tour. But kicking Rasmussen out when he was clearly the dominant rider just makes the final outcome in Paris unsatisfying.
Maybe we can give an honorable mention yellow jersey and all three podium finishers could wear one. As I said in an earlier blog when referring to Levi and his riding in the Pyrenees and time trial, he earned his podium position. I feel the same for the gritty riding by Evans and the incredible accelerations of Contador. All three of these riders deserve to be on the podium. But, does one of them deserve to stand on the top step?
BTW, a lot of journalists are saying that Contador is an unlikely winner. If you read my pre-Tour prediction article on this site, you will notice that I predicted that Contador was a lock for the white jersey, and that even though he might have to work for Levi, he was also a contender for the overall. Hey, that's why they pay me the big bucks.
So what is going to happen with the Tour? As I said in my blog yesterday, things will get worse before they get better because the first item on the agenda is for the Tour organization (ASO) to define its relationship with the UCI. In all probability this will result in WWIII and the Tour will probably make serious moves to distance itself from the UCI. ASO has a huge sports property and clearly feels a need to protect its viability. To save the Tour, ASO feels that it needs to divorce itself from the UCI.
As far as the doping problem goes, I see this as two separate problems. First, there are the systematic doping programs that some professional teams employ. These systematic programs need to be dismantled much like what Bob Stapleton is attempting to do at T-Mobile. Secondly, there are the individual riders who operate outside the purview of their team. This is a much more difficult problem and the only current solution is more out-of-competition testing. I think it will be easier for the teams, if they really want to, to clean up their own internal doping programs, I am hoping that more out-of-competition controls will catch the lone wolves.
Hey, don't give up hope. The Tour has been around for 100-plus years. It has survived two world wars and a 20-plus-year drought of no French victory so it will survive. I haven't given up hope and neither should you!
Thanks for reading,
Bruce
Active Expert: Bruce Hildenbrand
Previous Next
Brad Anders
Bruce, you say there are two separate problems with doping, team doping programs and individual rider doping. I agree, but these two problems are just the tip of the iceberg:
1. Undetectable drugs and practices: there are a number of drugs and doping practices (e.g. blood doping with your own blood) that are essentially undetectable. Riders today can use testosterone with little chance of it being detected as long as they keep below the 4:1 ratio. HGH is essentially undetectable. EPO is detectable only for a short period, while the positive effects last for weeks. Even if new tests are developed for these drugs and practices, it's likely that there will be new drugs and practices to replace them. A savvy athlete and coach who know these drugs and practices can implement them in such a way that the athlete will never test positive. For this reason alone, the idea that drug testing can assure a "clean" sport is a myth.
2. Unreliable drug tests: The EPO urine test has had serious challenges and has been overturned in several cases. The flow cytometry test used for homologus blood doping is purely qualitative and is vastly overpromoted by it's inventor (who was apparently present during some parts of Tyler Hamilton's tests), and has never been tested for false positives. Testosterone tests have been widely criticized before Floyd and the recent batch. In an attempt to stop doping, officials have bought into shoddy tests for the tougher substances to detect, and as a result, have vastly increased the probability of false positives. Given the witch hunt atmosphere that surrounds doping positives, even a positive "A" sample with one of these dubious tests followed by a negative "B" sample often ruins an athlete's career.
3. Unethical officals, organizations, and labs: The WADA charter is clear - the rights of the athlete to due process must be protected above all. Yet Dick Pound has made a career of commenting on and condemming athletes long before they full due process has taken place. Labs regularly leak confidential info to the press that cannot be refuted by the athlete. These practices have undermined the athletes rights and the fairness of the process and those responsible must be excised.
.... and there are many more factors. In short, drug testing will NEVER be able to assure a "clean" sport, and it is simply HUMAN NATURE that some fraction of people will cheat to attain glory and monetary reward. Even within the rules, people will do everything possible to stretch the interpretation to their advantage (i.e. just read Mark Donahue's book, "The Unfair Advantage"). Because of these factors, pro sports as we know it may be ultimately doomed to be either a farce, such as this year's TdF, or to become something closer to pro wrestling, where the whole show is choreographed and there are no holds barred.
Todd Beagle
While it is disappointing that the Yellow Jersey holder was unceremoniously removed, to say there is no real Tour champion this year is utter nonsense. Rasmussen should never have been allowed into this year's tour. If the UCI hadn't been playing its little game with the ASO, Rasmussen never would have had a chance to wear the Yellow jersey. Rasmussen's being removed from the tour was the right thing. Sure, he was stripped without due process, but in today's "cycling climate", lying about your whereabouts and avoiding the possibilitiy of two tests leading up to the tour, speaks volumes about one's character, not to mention the incredible opportunity for impropriety. Rasmussen rides the TT of his life??? Come on!!! This performance wreaks of EPO... or maybe not. Maybe it was just a months worth of diligent training in the Dolomites without the, you know, irritating inconvenience of a drug test or two. One thing we all know is Rasmussen made certain we will never know.
What's that you say Mr. Rasmussen, the Mexican cycling federation has not conducted a surprise test on you in two or more years?
This man was cheated of the Yellow Jersey? He either cheated to get it, or he is just so blithering stupid, there can be no sensible argument that he has any claim to it. How anybody outside of Denmark could see it any other way is beyond me... wait a minute, it seems people in Denmark do see it that way, otherwise, Rasmussen may well have won the tour and, to boot, he'd still be a happy member of his national team.
The three guys who pedaled the best over 20 stages and, we believe, pedaled cleanly, found their way to the podium. The right three guys. Rasmussen was not among them and, as I wrote previously, either through cheating or just sublime stupidity, he created his plight, and it was a most deserved plight.
Contador, Evans, Leipheimer... sounds like the right podium mix to me.
fleur
Were we watching the same race? Sorry to disagree with your analysis, but I do. All three who podiumed deserved their place and in my opinion, the order was correct. Alberto consistently attacked in the mountains and to take nothing away from 2nd and 3rd placings,had Cadel or Levi done so, surely it would have been either who took the top spot, no?
But hey, thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Brad Anders
Another view of the possible future of the TdF, from an Oxford professor of ethics:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/sport/2007/07/30/sodrug130.xml
Knut M. Wittkowski
Another view at scoring performance, in general, and Contador, in particular:
http://www.livescience.com/health/070828_cyclist_ranking.html
http://newswire.rockefeller.edu/?page=engine&id=648
So who are the teams with systematic doping programs? Astana? RaboBank? Disco? If you believe Walsh Bruneel is the dope master with those refrigerated motorcycle panniers. T-Mobile/Telecom was obviously one of them based on your comments. Does that mean LA's program was better than Ullrich's?