Let's be clear and honest, cycling does not enjoy the finest reputation of a fair and clean playing field. In fact, apart from athletics and body building, its tough to see any sport that can compete with the amount of lying and cheating that occurs in cycling. Being a cyclist myself, many cynics question the physical feats that professional cyclists achieve. And despite trying to justify the results, I find myself agreeing with them more often than ever.
But the latest revelations of a new form of cheating has struck me as quite ludicrous. I recently read that, in an effort to get ahead, cyclists are now resorting to equipping their bikes with electric motors. Former Australian rower Sally Robbins wrote an article about the subject in her blog recently, calling into question Swiss cyclist Fabian Cancellara's performance in the Tour of Flanders and the Paris-Roubaix. The article contains a link to a Youtube video of former cyclist Davide Cassani explaining how the motor works.
Having initially scoffed at the idea a tiny electric motor, housed in the seat tube of the bike's frame and powering the pedals, could possibly make a difference, the video did input an element of doubt into my mind. Moreover, the explanation of Cancellera's unusual hand movements on the handlebars provide enough supporting evidence that he could have been using the system.
Another worrying piece of news were the revelations made by Floyd Landis. Putting aside the fact that he has no credibility, that he emphatically defended himself, using other people's millions, for 3 years, before admitting he doped during his 2006 Tour de France victory, Landis made a worrying accusation that has the potential to destroy the sport of cycling. In his admission of guilt, Landis not only pointed the finger at Lance Armstrong, his former US Postal team-mate, but claimed former team director, Johan Bruyneel, had a financial agreement with the International Cycling Union (UCI) to cover up a positive test from Armstrong in order to protect the image of cycling.
The UCI, Bruyneel, Armstrong and others who were named by Landis who were known to dabble in drug-related activities have categorically denied the allegations and shunned Landis, calling him bitter and vengeful. But, taking a step back, is it so hard to believe? Armstrong has been the pin-up boy of cycling since his extraordinary comeback from testicular cancer which included winning 7 consecutive Tours de France between 1999 and 2005. He was the image of cycling as a clean sport as all his current and past peers (Pantani, Ullrich and Riis to name a few) fell foul of the drug law. If it was discovered, he had been doping, either knowingly or unknowingly, the sport of cycling would implode. What little scraps of integrity it has left would be incinerated, the very sport shattered.
Generally, I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories because, mostly, they're fads that only attract people ignorant to the real, underlying facts. But, in this case, I'm not so sure. Given its reputation, I can't help feeling that this is true. At the moment, I'm clinging to the fact that the circumstantial allegations are being sounded by a man with less credibility than Jeffrey Skilling (look up "Enron" in Wikipedia if you don't know who he is) and that the hard evidence against the UCI and Armstrong are nil.
Cheating has always been a part of cycling. In its early years, the Tour de France was dogged by competitors taking short-cuts, sabotaging other competitor's bikes and 'doping' on alcohol. The evolution of performance-enhancing drugs, from steroid and amphetamine use in the '60s to Continuous Erythropoietin Receptor Activator (CERA), the highly-complex, virtually untraceable form of EPO used today, has had a profound and lasting effect on cycling. Cyclists are seen as drugged-up, highly-strung superhumans, who risk sacrificing their reputation and health by doping. This is the result of a festering environment, which promotes drug use by astronomical competitiveness and the demanding courses of which the riders are subjected to. Not only this, the UCI doesn't want to admit they have a problematic system and, thus, does not want to change. This mentality only serves to compound the problem.
Do I believe Cancellara has a motor in his bike? No, despite the video evidence, which is very compelling. He is a very strong, powerful rider who is known for vicious accelerations. Still, it does raise some doubts over the potential use of this technology in the future.
Do I believe the UCI covered up a Lance Armstrong positive dope test? Again no, although I have a higher level of suspicion than with the motor. It isn't out of the realms of my imagination that something like this could occur, however, it is a miracle they've kept it a secret this long.
Surely my doubts are the real (and worrying) confirmation of cycling's dubious reputation and suspect future.
Do I believe Cancellara has a motor in his bike? No, despite the video evidence, which is very compelling. He is a very strong, powerful rider who is known for vicious accelerations. Still, it does raise some doubts over the potential use of this technology in the future.
Do I believe the UCI covered up a Lance Armstrong positive dope test? Again no, although I have a higher level of suspicion than with the motor. It isn't out of the realms of my imagination that something like this could occur, however, it is a miracle they've kept it a secret this long.
Surely my doubts are the real (and worrying) confirmation of cycling's dubious reputation and suspect future.
No comments:
Post a Comment