Posted on 12/13/2017 2:29:26 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper
"It is well known that I have asthma and I know exactly what the rules are. I use an inhaler to manage my symptoms [always within the permissible limits] and I know for sure that I will be tested every day I wear the race leader's jersey," Froome said in a statement.
"My asthma got worse at the Vuelta so I followed the team doctor's advice to increase my salbutamol dosage. As always, I took the greatest care to ensure that I did not use more than the permissible dose.
"I take my leadership position in my sport very seriously. The UCI is absolutely right to examine test results and, together with the team, I will provide whatever information it requires."
(Excerpt) Read more at newstalkzb.co.nz ...
A TdF “doping shock”? Is that like a deviant Hollywood producer shock?
nine out od ten olypians claim to be
asthmatics
who believes that claim?
So if no one was doping, who would win? No one.
The Vuelta runs on the road not far from my house so we went up there on race day to see what it was all about. A group of riders nobody but a hard core fan could recognize blew by us in about 15 seconds, and that was it. It was free and even then I was left wondering if I got my money’s worth.
At some point, it becomes meaningless to hold athletic competitions in which the ‘best’ in a world of 6 billion people is singled out and heavily rewarded. The performance advantage that can be obtained through the use of pharmacological aids far exceeds any variations in training or genetics.
That point was reached long ago in cycling.
In terms and history of Professional Cycling, everybody knows the story and downfall of Lance Armstrong. After winning 7 straight (1999-2005) Tour de France titles, technology and accusations of cheating finally caught up with him (and his teams) in 2012 when all of his victories were voided back to 1998.
What was/is notable is that the Tour de France organization, the Amaury Sport Organisation (ASO), ruled, based on the fact that 6 of the 7 second place winners had already been found guilty or confessed of ‘doping’, that those years had NO WINNER! Thus the organization implicitly admitted that no team could have competed in those years and won without a pharmaceutical advantage and that Armstrong’s teams were just better at the ‘game’ than the others.
Kinda ironic, no? Either play the game better or don’t play at all? Especially when the ‘no play’ choice means finding a different career and abandoning the field to other ‘dopers’! What would any of us done in that situation? Personally, I’m glad I was not in that place to make that choice!
Let them all dope up to even the playing field. The ones who currently have an advantage are the ones who don’t get caught..........
If the bicycle riders would only add a motor then they would not need any drugs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.