# Another Masters Racer Busted



## Local Hero

62 year old grandpa tested positive for 'roids, EPO, and amphetamines at Nationals. 

US Cycling Athlete, LeDuc, Accepts Sanction For Anti-Doping Rule Violation | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)

No word on if he was also positive for [email protected] or if he dedicated himself to the sage, monkish lifestyle of most professional masters racers and sworn off the opposite sex.


----------



## Local Hero

Funny quote: 

David LeDuc has been cycling for the past 25 years and believes drugs have likely always been in the sport, as in many others.

Though LeDuc, 55, never raced in Europe where cycling is more popular, he said the fact that people are trying to make a living off the sport plays a factor in drug use.

"I think there are probably just as many drugs in all sports, too, but cycling for some reason is under the microscope right now," said LeDuc, the oldest racer in the Pro-1/2/3 and eigh th-place finisher in a field of about 50. "Any of the big four sports - basketball, baseball, football and hockey - if they were subjected to the amount of testing as cycling, they wouldn't stand for it."

LeDuc began racing in 1980 after becoming inspired by the movie "Breaking Away," the story of a young man who changes his life through cycling. LeDuc, hailing from Willow Springs, N.C., where he owns a roofing company, went on to transform his own life and create an impressive resume including his most-prized achievement - the 2001 World Road Race Champion title (ages 50-53) - and 18 national titles.

Despite the current distrust, LeDuc does not think cycling has been tainted and said it's something he wants to do for the rest of his life.

"As long as I've got a pulse, I'll keep racing," said LeDuc, who was hit by a car while riding last year and back on a bike in two weeks. "It's getting hard because they keep getting faster and I keep getting slower. But I'll do it until they put my last nail in my coffin."

Scandals don't deter Chesapeake Criterium riders | HamptonRoads.com | PilotOnline.com


----------



## nhluhr

Holy ****, I know this guy!

He used to come into the shop I worked at in college back in Raleigh NC. Something about his attitude back then makes me not so surprised to hear about this.


----------



## bradkay

I remember Dave LeDuc from the old days... I guess that he got tired of the rest of the peleton leaving him behind.


----------



## mpre53

Local Hero said:


> No word on if he was also positive for [email protected] or if he dedicated himself to the sage, monkish lifestyle of most professional masters racers and sworn off the opposite sex.


Hey now, not every 60+ dude needs that kind of "help". :lol:


----------



## Local Hero

mpre53 said:


> Hey now, not every 60+ dude needs that kind of "help". :lol:


Of course not. 

But if a guy is taking several different drugs to race his bike he's probably taking another to get his pecker hard.


----------



## spade2you

They're natural supplements!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## jmchapple

He started racing in cat 3's in NC last year and I thought that was suspicious. In the past he would dominate (no exaggeration) master's races, then do the pro1/2 race and still finish high up. I can say I beat a doper a few times last year.

Pathetic


----------



## Wookiebiker

jmchapple said:


> In the past he would dominate (no exaggeration) master's races, then do the pro1/2 race and still finish high up. I can say I beat a doper a few times last year.


There are more than a few Masters 40+ racers here that do that ... it's pretty common place for them to race the Masters in the morning, then the Pro 1/2 race in the afternoon (and place top 10 in the 1/2 races) ... mostly in crits, but I've seen them do it plenty of times in road races also.


----------



## Local Hero

It's pretty common for top masters guys to race two crits in a day around here too. If the second race is only $10 and a guy can support his <35 teammates, why not?


----------



## Addict07

I have raced against him many times and many of us suspected he was on something, he was just so dominant. He could just solo away from a masters field at will. Two things surprised me in the announcement: that they did not reach backward at all to strip him of his palmares, and that he was using EPO, which seems to be a notch higher than the usual steroids you suspect in masters racing.


----------



## den bakker

Addict07 said:


> I have raced against him many times and many of us suspected he was on something, he was just so dominant. He could just solo away from a masters field at will. Two things surprised me in the announcement: that they did not reach backward at all to strip him of his palmares, and that he was using EPO, which seems to be a notch higher than the usual steroids you suspect in masters racing.


short of him confessing to previous use or team mates testifying, how would they be able to touch previous results?


----------



## jmorgan

den bakker said:


> short of him confessing to previous use or team mates testifying, how would they be able to touch previous results?


short of him proving he was clean, why should he get to keep his previous results?

Anyone with some common sense would know there is no way he started using EPO, roids, and amphetamines on Sept. 5th of this year. When its that blatant and that outrageous, why should they ever get to compete again. 

When he comes back in 2 years you think he is going to race clean all of a sudden when he is 64 years old and his power is dropping.


----------



## Addict07

Although I don't know the depth to which they investigate these amateur guys, I would assume part of it would be trying to establish where he got the drugs from (illegal without a prescription, possibly supplying to other athletes) and how long he had been using. I suppose he could always stonewall them, but USADA potentially could trade his cooperation for a reduced penalty.


----------



## Bridgey

Here in Australia, we had the Masters National RR on one day and then the Crits on another. Word got around that the dope testers were coming for the RR. A few mates of mine who were riding them said that about 30% of the field dropped out of pretty much all Master age categories. But then they all rode the Crits the next day. Go figure that out??

Old men trying to escape a mid life crisis?


----------



## Addict07

LeDuc has something like 18 national and 1 world title in masters...he has been juicing for a long time.


----------



## Local Hero

Bridgey said:


> Old men trying to escape a mid life crisis?


Can be done with or without doping.


----------



## jmchapple

Wookiebiker said:


> There are more than a few Masters 40+ racers here that do that ... it's pretty common place for them to race the Masters in the morning, then the Pro 1/2 race in the afternoon (and place top 10 in the 1/2 races) ... mostly in crits, but I've seen them do it plenty of times in road races also.


I have noticed it happening less in the last couple of seasons around NC. The ones that people have been suspicious of are still winning but don't seem to be riding away from people. maybe the drug use is lessening.


----------



## aramis

Addict07 said:


> LeDuc has something like 18 national and 1 world title in masters...he has been juicing for a long time.


They should all be stripped. In amateur racing it seems even more evil to ridiculous than in professional levels.


----------



## Local Hero

strip or don't strip

What's the difference?

We all know the guy is a dirty cheat. It's not like he has any future in cycling -- he's 62 and a proven doper -- and he will have any credibility claiming that he ever won anything clean. 

The titles are meaningless anyway.


----------



## den bakker

jmorgan said:


> short of him proving he was clean, why should he get to keep his previous results?
> 
> Anyone with some common sense would know there is no way he started using EPO, roids, and amphetamines on Sept. 5th of this year. When its that blatant and that outrageous, why should they ever get to compete again.
> 
> When he comes back in 2 years you think he is going to race clean all of a sudden when he is 64 years old and his power is dropping.


Well for starters there would be the rules he raced under.


----------



## spade2you

aramis said:


> They should all be stripped. In amateur racing it seems even more evil to ridiculous than in professional levels.


I wouldn't go that far. Although, it's a tad pointless to argue either way since testing is minimal. I don't think there has been a single drug test in my area since I've started racing. I'm inclined to think masters might be a tad more prone to doping since there's a low testosterone crisis sweeping the nation.


----------



## Alaska Mike

spade2you said:


> I'm inclined to think masters might be a tad more prone to doping since there's a low testosterone crisis sweeping the nation.


I think I have a case of that and should look into mass quantities of testosterone. Why, the other day I was _*tired*_.


----------



## spade2you

Alaska Mike said:


> I think I have a case of that and should look into mass quantities of testosterone. Why, the other day I was _*tired*_.


Depending on your physician, you wouldn't need that strong of an excuse to treat your dangerously low t. Be sure to come in for frequent visits and lab draws.


----------



## Local Hero

Alaska Mike said:


> I think I have a case of that and should look into mass quantities of testosterone. Why, the other day I was _*tired*_.


You think that's bad? I've felt *older* every year since undergrad.


----------



## davidka

bradkay said:


> I remember Dave LeDuc from the old days... I guess that he got tired of the rest of the peleton leaving him behind.


I remember him from the old days too, but I don't remember him ever being left behind. On the contrary. I once watched him ride a whole crit in an ever changing break (senior 1/2, not master's) where he continued dropping guys after they'd bridge, then he left them all with 2 to go. I think he was 50 at the time.



jmorgan said:


> short of him proving he was clean, why should he get to keep his previous results?
> 
> Anyone with some common sense would know there is no way he started using EPO, roids, and amphetamines on Sept. 5th of this year.


Sorry, common sense is not enough to sanction or charge. That just isn't the world we live in.


----------



## ashpelham

I've got to think that perhaps I know this guy as well. I never got above Cat 3 when I lived in the Carolinas around the turn of the century, but those masters races (I was in my late 20s then) sure seemed fast and intense. Friend I worked with and trained every day at lunch on the Charlotte-Myers Park Booty Loop said he was aware some masters level guys he had to compete against were juicing. I thought it was his sour grapes bc he was always behind the top 10, but this friend of mine had ridden in the Pan Am games in the 90's once. So I know he was at one time fast. He could stomp me around the Booty Loop even then.

Any of you folks familiar with Charlotte will know what I'm talking about.


----------



## Alaska Mike

It's time to hang up your racing shoes when you have your own doping article in CyclingNews, and you're an amateur. No flying under the radar when the ban is over- you line up and everyone will know exactly who you are. I hope USADA keep hammering the Masters fields across the country, so that maybe a few of these idiots will think twice. Getting popped for an OTC cold medication or something for a truly legitimate medical condition is one thing, but EPO? At least we weren't subjected to a long court case like with Meeker.



Local Hero said:


> You think that's bad? I've felt *older* every year since undergrad.


It certainly couldn't be that I'm almost 44 and have a 3 week old baby that doesn't let me get more than a few hours of sleep at night, a full-time job, an alpine ski racing coaching gig a couple days a week, a full schedule of cycling training sessions on my plate, and a horrible diet. Nahh, it must be that my darn old low T.

I've thought about getting it checked from time to time, but it would be purely for trivia's sake. What good would knowing really do me? I wouldn't be interested in getting on a "replacement" regimen (for health, family, and ethical reasons), and I figure anyone that can maintain my lifestyle for any given amount of time has no legitimate reason for considering it. 

Sure I'm tired, and I should be. I earned it. It's a victory just keeping my head above water.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

RALEIGH: Legendary local bicycle racer gets two-year suspension for banned drugs | Local/State | NewsObserver.com



> LeDuc said that he had been riding clean when he won the national championships. He declined to say how long he had been using the amphetamines, but that he had been using the testosterone and EPO* only a short period* before he got caught.
> 
> “The irony is that *it didn’t help*, because this year I had the worst results of my life,” he said.


:idea:


----------



## Cinelli 82220

Everyone only uses it for a short period before getting caught.


----------



## spade2you

Cinelli 82220 said:


> Everyone only uses it for a short period before getting caught.


...or they were only _about_ to use it. 

Level playing field?


----------



## skitorski

So is this Duc 55 or 62 yo ???


----------



## Addict07

skitorski said:


> So is this Duc 55 or 62 yo ???


He is 62. The confusion stems from an older article from 2006 about him.


----------



## The Tedinator

That's it champ! Show that 14 year old punk who's boss!


----------



## DonMI6

Thats a great picture. What an absolute wanker!


----------



## spade2you

Oyve. Something also tells me they're not even sprinting for a podium position.


----------



## foto

Wait, you can wear rainbows for winning Masters?


----------



## den bakker

foto said:


> Wait, you can wear rainbows for winning Masters?


why not? as long as it's a masters race of the appropriate age category.


----------



## stevesbike

maybe time for some lawsuits against these guys - maybe a class action suit of racers who were defrauded by these guys (how much were amateurs defrauded in entry fees?) or companies that were defamed by them - e.g., Meeker's claim that his Hammer products were contaminated when none of the capsules were but only some mysterious loose powder in the container (that somehow came from broken contaminated capsules). A BS story that was part of the attempt to ban him more time.

It's not like a pro who loses his livelihood from a ban. Maybe showing there's financial consequences will make amateur racers think twice about doping.


----------



## spade2you

So would testing.


----------



## stevesbike

good point! I was going to add a line about suing USA cycling. My recollection is that masters license fees are a large part of their revenue and they've been extraordinarily negligent in protecting the integrity of masters racing. It's unbelievable that Meeker's positive was the first time he's been tested. Wonder if this guy has been tested before.



spade2you said:


> So would testing.


----------



## Fireform

stevesbike said:


> good point! I was going to add a line about suing USA cycling. My recollection is that masters license fees are a large part of their revenue and they've been extraordinarily negligent in protecting the integrity of masters racing. It's unbelievable that Meeker's positive was the first time he's been tested. Wonder if this guy has been tested before.


Neither I nor any of the masters I race with have ever been tested. It's a joke.


----------



## spade2you

I'd be surprised if there were any testing in my state or surrounding states. I don't really see that changing unless USAC starts randomly attending races and testing people. Probably not enough $ in amateur racing to justify the cost of testing.


----------



## vagabondcyclist

spade2you said:


> I'd be surprised if there were any testing in my state or surrounding states. I don't really see that changing unless USAC starts randomly attending races and testing people. Probably not enough $ in amateur racing to justify the cost of testing.


USACycling is pushing its RaceClean program. I know my local governing body is participating--we get to put the logo on race flyers, etc. RaceClean includes what USACycling calls a "grassroots" initiative.

*Grassroots Testing — USA Cycling is working with its Local Associations that want to invest in more testing at the local level. USA Cycling will match funds up to $6,000 for each of the 34 Local Associations across the U.S. The Local Associations will opt into the program that USADA will execute.*​
I think the $6,000 match covers or comes close to covering half the cost of one race of testing. The program calls for more testing at national-level events and out of competition testing.


----------



## den bakker

Fireform said:


> Neither I nor any of the masters I race with have ever been tested. It's a joke.


How much are you willing to pay per year?


----------



## stevesbike

if the organizer of a gran fondo can shell out the $ to test at his event, USA cycling can for a few random masters events. Even if they did for a subset of banned substances to reduce costs, at least the non-zero prospect of being tested might have some effect. Certainly should be done routinely at national championships or targeted at guys who dominate regions.



den bakker said:


> How much are you willing to pay per year?


----------



## den bakker

stevesbike said:


> if the organizer of a gran fondo can shell out the $ to test at his event, USA cycling can for a few random masters events. Even if they did for a subset of banned substances to reduce costs, at least the non-zero prospect of being tested might have some effect. Certainly should be done routinely at national championships or targeted at guys who dominate regions.


thanks for not providing a number. 
how much per test, how many tests? how many riders to pay for the tests?


----------



## Fireform

If, say, 25% of the cost of one analysis was added to my fee, and if that led to testing, on average of 25% of participants, I would pay it gladly.


----------



## spade2you

What about random testing? I understand it would be cost prohibitive to test everyone at every race. If they show up to randomly test 5 people in each category at a given race, perhaps some guys might think twice.


----------



## den bakker

Fireform said:


> If, say, 25% of the cost of one analysis was added to my fee, and if that led to testing, on average of 25% of participants, I would pay it gladly.


I'm sorry, that still does not tell me what my 2015 USACYCLING licence for master racing would be? is that a 20$ increase, $200 or $2000 increase? (surely we can gauge it within factors of 10?)


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

den bakker said:


> How much are you willing to pay per year?


The number would be far less then the $7,000 bike and 3 sets of $3,000 wheels many of these guys show up to races with. 

$2-3 per race?


----------



## den bakker

Doctor Falsetti said:


> $2-3 per race?


I don't know the price that's why I am asking. price of wheels or frames is completely irrelevant.


----------



## Fireform

It's my understanding that a PED urine analysis runs about $150-200 per. Anybody know whether that's right?

Last season at the FL state road championships, the winner in each division was tested along with three random bib numbers each day. Altogether less than two dozen analyses, or less than $5000 in testing, for the whole event. 

At other, lower profile events there might be two or three tests at the entire race. Out of competition testing for master's? Never heard of it.


----------



## den bakker

Fireform said:


> It's my understanding that a PED urine analysis runs about $150-200 per. Anybody know whether that's right?
> 
> Last season at the FL state road championships, the winner in each division was tested along with three random bib numbers each day. Altogether less than two dozen analyses, or less than $5000 in testing, for the whole event.
> 
> At other, lower profile events there might be two or three tests at the entire race. Out of competition testing for master's? Never heard of it.


ok. and would you consider urine tests adequate to catch people doing EPO, as evident from the case of this thread? 
and even without: with less than 2 dozens analyses, how would you consider the effectiveness of such a testing programme?


----------



## Fireform

den bakker said:


> ok. and would you consider urine tests adequate to catch people doing EPO, as evident from the case of this thread?
> and even without: with less than 2 dozens analyses, how would you consider the effectiveness of such a testing programme?


My point is that it's obvious that the current level of testing is laughably inadequate. I personally would be fine with paying more for a more realistic level of deterrence.


----------



## troutmd

In reading this tread (sadly as I honestly have pity on the violator) I'm reminded of coaching Little League.

Competitive sports doesn't always bring out the best in humanity.

$3000 wheels and some other performance enhancements to win a master race that might be listed on page 12 in the local sports section?

I must have my priorities all wrong (again).


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

den bakker said:


> I don't know the price that's why I am asking. price of wheels or frames is completely irrelevant.


No, it is very irrelevant. It is a good indication that the customer base is able to pay. 

The cost of the testing depends on what is run. From $100-$1000. What usually happens is they run the basic steroid profile and ratio test and if they find something they run the more expensive tests (IRMS, EPO). They also have to pay for the DCO's time. 

GFNY paid $17,000 for USADA to perform 10 tests at the race as well as a number of OOC tests. The OOC's are expensive but are the biggest detriment. 

Here are some of the elements 

1. Six kits x $27 = $162 paid to USA Cycling 
2. Postage for kits to venue = $20 paid to USA Cycling 
3. Postage for kits to lab = $40 paid to carrier 
4. Six lab tests x $195 = $1170 paid to Laboratory 
5. Six EPO tests (if requested by the UCI) x $150 = $900 
6. Two hotel nights x $120 = $240 paid to hotel 
7. Two days of rental car (if you are not transporting him) = $60 
8. Mileage or airfare of DCO = $100 to $500 depending 
9. Supplies = ~$50 
Total Estimated Costs -- ~$1780 - $3140 

Of course if USAC/USADA developed a wider program that includes multiple sports the costs can come down


----------



## Addict07

stevesbike said:


> good point! I was going to add a line about suing USA cycling. My recollection is that masters license fees are a large part of their revenue and they've been extraordinarily negligent in protecting the integrity of masters racing. It's unbelievable that Meeker's positive was the first time he's been tested. Wonder if this guy has been tested before.


Just like Meeker, this was LeDuc's first ever test.


----------



## Addict07

Fireform said:


> My point is that it's obvious that the current level of testing is laughably inadequate. I personally would be fine with paying more for a more realistic level of deterrence.


I would also be willing to pay more. One source of funding is team sponsorship money. Our team raises almost $25,000 from sponsors every year, which allows everyone to get "free" kits, helmets, sunglasses, race entries...all of which we can afford to pay for ourselves. What if each team was assessed some amount ($100? $200?) per racer per season to fund a testing pool. You could also raise the annual license fee by $5 for this fund as well. Ultimately the money will come out of our pockets


----------



## den bakker

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No, it is very irrelevant. It is a good indication that the customer base is able to pay.
> 
> The cost of the testing depends on what is run. From $100-$1000. What usually happens is they run the basic steroid profile and ratio test and if they find something they run the more expensive tests (IRMS, EPO). They also have to pay for the DCO's time.
> 
> GFNY paid $17,000 for USADA to perform 10 tests at the race as well as a number of OOC tests. The OOC's are expensive but are the biggest detriment.
> 
> Here are some of the elements
> 
> 1. Six kits x $27 = $162 paid to USA Cycling
> 2. Postage for kits to venue = $20 paid to USA Cycling
> 3. Postage for kits to lab = $40 paid to carrier
> 4. Six lab tests x $195 = $1170 paid to Laboratory
> 5. Six EPO tests (if requested by the UCI) x $150 = $900
> 6. Two hotel nights x $120 = $240 paid to hotel
> 7. Two days of rental car (if you are not transporting him) = $60
> 8. Mileage or airfare of DCO = $100 to $500 depending
> 9. Supplies = ~$50
> Total Estimated Costs -- ~$1780 - $3140
> 
> Of course if USAC/USADA developed a wider program that includes multiple sports the costs can come down


thank you. so 17 grand for 10 tests. 
we would need around 30 per year per 100 masters (1 test per master every three years on average, not exactly high) that would be 50 grand per year. or 500 bucks per master rider per year. (which by the way is more than I have spend on average per year on wheels and frames). 
of course at some point the testers have to be paid as well.


----------



## foto

The day an "official" from my beer league bike racing hobby comes to my house for an out-of-competition doping test is the day I quit bike racing. Sure, test the podium of a race, and do some random testing too. But interrupt my evening, with all the other things I am trying to balance, to get a urine sample, or blood sample even? That's a little overboard for a sport that really _actually_ doesn't matter.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

den bakker said:


> thank you. so 17 grand for 10 tests.
> .


No. That 17 Grand included 10 in competition tests *and* multiple OOC. Based on the cost figures I posted, and I have more if you need them, 6 in competition tests with EPO would cost about $2500. There are multiple ways to bring that down to @$2000. Based on your figures that would be about $50 per rider, per year....but I think if a national wide testing program was rolled out the costs would drop and USADA has already said they will subsidize some of the costs


----------



## Addict07

den bakker said:


> thank you. so 17 grand for 10 tests.
> we would need around 30 per year per 100 masters (1 test per master every three years on average, not exactly high) that would be 50 grand per year. or 500 bucks per master rider per year. (which by the way is more than I have spend on average per year on wheels and frames).
> of course at some point the testers have to be paid as well.


I think a much less expensive route is to use the deterrent value of testing and selective targeting. If USADA only showed up unannounced at two races per year and tested the podium of the 35+ and 45+ masters races plus two others randomly selected or targeted from the field, that is 20 tests. Where I race (NC/SC) there are easily 150 racers in each of these age groups (not at each race, but licensed and on teams), so now the figure is down to $34,000 spread over 300 riders, or $110.


----------



## woodys737

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No. That 17 Grand included 10 in competition tests *and* multiple OOC. Based on the cost figures I posted, and I have more if you need them, 6 in competition tests with EPO would cost about $2500. There are multiple ways to bring that down to @$2000. Based on your figures that would be about $50 per rider, per year....but I think if a national wide testing program was rolled out the costs would drop *and USADA has already said they will subsidize some of the costs[*/QUOTE]
> 
> From USAC Raceclean page.
> Grassroots Testing — USA Cycling is working with its Local Associations that want to invest in more testing at the local level. USA Cycling will match funds up to $6,000 for each of the 34 Local Associations across the U.S. The Local Associations will opt into the program that USADA will execute.


----------



## vagabondcyclist

My local association (LAMBRA) is participating in RaceClean and I found the email detailing the costs. I'm the faculty adviser for a collegiate club so I'm on the email discussion list. 

"$1,750, or two [events] for $3,500." There was no discussion of raising race fees to cover the costs. We did discuss having to do so if we wanted to do more than one event in the future. 

From the RaceClean site that I and Woodys737 quote, USACycling has a program to help local associations by matching whatever money the local association puts up for testing. 

My sense of it is there will be no out of competition tests for non-National level or Pro racers. 

As someone who works with young riders and their families, I'm all for sending a message that cycling is clean. When I meet with parents from high schools or parents during "move in day at the dorms" and talk to them about our collegiate club, I emphasize the fun, the character building, team work, life long fitness, and all the warm fuzzy aspects of racing. Having reports in the news about doping doesn't help. I live in area that isn't known for physical activity other than football so...


----------



## viciouscycle

Alaska Mike said:


> Sure I'm tired, and I should be. I earned it. It's a victory just keeping my head above water.



That is LIFE, you have earned it, enjoy it!


And about the old guy doping, make a stand, he should never be allowed to race a sanctioned race again.


----------



## Alaska Mike

I think USAC has to balance a fine line here in regards to cost. If they raise the fees to fund testing, they run the risk of people not taking out licenses or "breakaway" leagues forming and further eroding their membership. Don't kid yourself, even though people spend thousands on bikes and kit, many will balk at a $50/year increase. If they rely on the clubs and teams to foot the bill, they run the risk of having them fold or contract significantly, which reduces the number of organizing bodies (and grunt labor) for races and other USAC-related events.

Do nothing, and allow the status quo, and things will likely continue as they are with racers doping with little chance of getting caught. Does the unlevel playing field drive away racers in significant numbers? That's up for debate. Most people who aren't racing haven't tried yet, have tried but found it too hard or not to their liking, found it too expensive, or just don't have the time to dedicate to the sport. I think any of those would far outweigh "too many dopers" as a reason for non-participation.

I don't race in an USAC league. My sanctioning body dropped USAC years ago because they didn't provide much bang for the buck in our neck of the woods, and the extra cost associated with a license probably kept numbers down. If we were to go back to USAC, we would likely end up subsidizing testing in other areas and not see any testing at our own races, based on geographic isolation. I don't see that happening.

Don't get me wrong, more testing and catching dopers is a good thing. How USAC moves forward from here is what's really important. The fact that we've had a few high-profile cases show up give me hope that some will think twice before doping, but I expect the dopers will likely be more careful. Until you can fund a comprehensive testing program, you're not really going to catch most of them or make a significant dent, but how that effort is funded is the real question.


----------



## stevesbike

IF USAC doesn't do more to support the integrity of grassroots level cycling, then a breakaway league specifically for masters level racing would be a good idea. Right now, masters license fee $ goes to fund elite-level testing, so what's the 'value proposition' for masters? Promoters and clubs put on races. Who needs USAC? To say nothing of fees going to support the salaries of guys like Steve Johnson.... 



Alaska Mike said:


> I think USAC has to balance a fine line here in regards to cost. If they raise the fees to fund testing, they run the risk of people not taking out licenses or "breakaway" leagues forming and further eroding their membership. Don't kid yourself, even though people spend thousands on bikes and kit, many will balk at a $50/year increase. If they rely on the clubs and teams to foot the bill, they run the risk of having them fold or contract significantly, which reduces the number of organizing bodies (and grunt labor) for races and other USAC-related events.
> 
> Do nothing, and allow the status quo, and things will likely continue as they are with racers doping with little chance of getting caught. Does the unlevel playing field drive away racers in significant numbers? That's up for debate. Most people who aren't racing haven't tried yet, have tried but found it too hard or not to their liking, found it too expensive, or just don't have the time to dedicate to the sport. I think any of those would far outweigh "too many dopers" as a reason for non-participation.
> 
> I don't race in an USAC league. My sanctioning body dropped USAC years ago because they didn't provide much bang for the buck in our neck of the woods, and the extra cost associated with a license probably kept numbers down. If we were to go back to USAC, we would likely end up subsidizing testing in other areas and not see any testing at our own races, based on geographic isolation. I don't see that happening.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, more testing and catching dopers is a good thing. How USAC moves forward from here is what's really important. The fact that we've had a few high-profile cases show up give me hope that some will think twice before doping, but I expect the dopers will likely be more careful. Until you can fund a comprehensive testing program, you're not really going to catch most of them or make a significant dent, but how that effort is funded is the real question.


----------



## woodys737

stevesbike said:


> IF USAC doesn't do more to support the integrity of grassroots level cycling, then a breakaway league specifically for masters level racing would be a good idea. Right now, masters license fee $ goes to fund elite-level testing, so what's the 'value proposition' for masters? Promoters and clubs put on races. Who needs USAC? To say nothing of fees going to support the salaries of guys like Steve Johnson....


Well said.


----------



## 32and3cross

foto said:


> The day an "official" from my beer league bike racing hobby comes to my house for an out-of-competition doping test is the day I quit bike racing. Sure, test the podium of a race, and do some random testing too. But interrupt my evening, with all the other things I am trying to balance, to get a urine sample, or blood sample even? That's a little overboard for a sport that really _actually_ doesn't matter.


Then don't take out a license to race because that precisely what you are agreeing too. In fact that (an out of comp test) is what caught one of the masters dopers around here.


----------



## foto

32and3cross said:


> Then don't take out a license to race because that precisely what you are agreeing too. In fact that (an out of comp test) is what caught one of the masters dopers around here.


That makes no sense, but thanks for the advice I guess.

I agree to play by the rules but as soon as "officials" intrude upon my private life to test me for my hobby is when this isn't worth it to me _anymore_. I will continue to buy a license and race as a lousy local cat 3 because it is fun and I have no delusions about how racing fits into my lifestyle.

I don't care if 1 or 20 master's losers caught popped in OOC, frankly. Their miserable lives are their problems.

You know marijuana is a banned substance, right? How many people would keep racing if there was a risk getting suspended for 2 years for smoking a joint? Employers possibly finding out? Screw that. If people want to go to the olympics or compete for Nats or Worlds or whatever, fine. But testing joe schmoe bike racer OOC is totally bogus and pretty stupid really.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

foto said:


> You know marijuana is a banned substance, right? How many people would keep racing if there was a risk getting suspended for 2 years for smoking a joint? .


Only in competition. Outside of competition spark up..... but during a industrial park crit it is not allowed


----------



## Cinelli 82220

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Only in competition. Outside of competition spark up..... but during a industrial park crit it is not allowed


Would a positive for THC remain confidential?

Something like that could literally ruin some people's lives, at the very least cost them their jobs.

The offender in this case is clearly off his nut as others have already mentioned. EPO, roids and whatever else to win bike races? He must be a helluva guy off the bike too.


----------



## foto

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Only in competition. Outside of competition spark up..... but during a industrial park crit it is not allowed


Are you thinking about Narcotics? This is what USADA has to say about Cannabinoids:

_Natural or synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and THC-like cannabinoids (e.g. hashish, marijuana, HU-210) are prohibited.

Advisory:

Athletes should be aware that cannabinoids may be retained in fat tissue following chronic use and may be detected weeks after use. There have been situations where sudden weight loss has caused cannabinoid metabolites stored in fat to be released in detectable levels. USADA strongly advises athletes not to use cannabinoids at any time.
Although recreational marijuana use was recently legalized by Colorado and Washington voters in constitutional amendments, marijuana use remains prohibited in sport in accordance with the 2013 WADA Prohibited List._


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

foto said:


> Are you thinking about Narcotics?


No, Pot

Prohibited List - Athlete Guide | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)



> Substances and Methods Prohibited *In-Competition*
> 
> This section focuses on substances that are prohibited only *in-competition*. These substances are not tested for out-of-competition........
> 
> S8. Cannabinoids
> 
> 
> Natural or synthetic tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and THC-like cannabinoids (e.g. hashish, marijuana, HU-210) are prohibited.


It is banned in competition. It is not tested for OOC. Smoke it all you want outside of competition.....just make sure it has cleared from your system.


----------



## foto

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No, Pot
> 
> Prohibited List - Athlete Guide | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is banned in competition. It is not tested for OOC. Smoke it all you want outside of competition.....just make sure it has cleared from your system.


Gotcha, I feel much better now! ;P


----------



## Alaska Mike

stevesbike said:


> IF USAC doesn't do more to support the integrity of grassroots level cycling, then a breakaway league specifically for masters level racing would be a good idea. Right now, masters license fee $ goes to fund elite-level testing, so what's the 'value proposition' for masters? Promoters and clubs put on races. Who needs USAC? To say nothing of fees going to support the salaries of guys like Steve Johnson....


I used to carry an USSA alpine ski racing coaching license. I knew the vast majority of the fees went to support elite competition (e.g. the US Ski Team) and was completely fine with that, but dropped it because I didn't feel like i was getting any real value for holding it. It was about $50 more than a current USAC competitor license. I didn't need it, so I dropped it. Nice to have that choice.

OOC testing for Masters does seem a bit overboard, even if it might snag a couple more dopers. I think you really need to get all of the low-hanging fruit (guys that are glowing during events) first before you consider that sort of thing. Just ensuring that the field wasn't running on jet fuel would be a nice step forward. Sure they may have made drug-fueled adaptations, but at least they'd be dialed back somewhat.


----------



## vagabondcyclist

Alaska Mike said:


> OOC testing for Masters does seem a bit overboard, even if it might snag a couple more dopers. I think you really need to get all of the *low-hanging fruit (guys that are glowing during events)* first before you consider that sort of thing. *Just ensuring that the field wasn't running on jet fuel would be a nice step forward.* Sure they may have made drug-fueled adaptations, but at least they'd be dialed back somewhat.


Based on the email back and forth of my association's discussion of RaceClean, it sounds like we (and thus I'd assume USACycling) are taking the low hanging fruit approach. That is, provide some matching funds to help local/regional associations do some limited in-competition testing during some races followed by some in-competition testing at national events. 

At this point it sounds like to me that RaceClean is about sending a message that racing clean is expected. Will testing at ONE race or TWO races make a huge difference? Probably not, but, as Alaska Mike notes, it will force some to dial things back a notch or two. 

What this latest episode shows is how much of a slippery slope doping can be. Someone starts with AndroGel or whatever and then they're into EPO. We need to stop that progression or at least slow it down. 

Someone said some folks show up and think racing is too hard, well yeah when there are 35-50 year olds in Cat 5 doped up (and I know the guy we're talking about wasn't Cat 5) the learning/training curve can seem really steep.


----------



## jimenaruiz

What is crazy about all of this is the fact that there are entire sections within forums now devoted to the topic. When did we get to the point that professional athletes are using roids like a hound dog eats its' own poop. It is sad that this is becoming the example to children of how an athlete is allowed to behave. It isn't about using a substance for me as much as it is about cheating. Build your physical gifts naturally. Taking something to improve your performance instead of good old fashioned American hard work is just shameful.


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> No, Pot
> 
> Prohibited List - Athlete Guide | U.S. Anti-Doping Agency (USADA)
> 
> 
> 
> It is banned in competition. It is not tested for OOC. Smoke it all you want outside of competition.....just make sure it has cleared from your system.


I tried marijuana over a decade ago and haven't touched it since then so I don't have a dog in the fight, but the "it is only tested in competition" argument is hollow, seeing how marijuana can be detected for up to 30 days. 

A guy who smokes a joint on Sunday nights will test positive on the following Saturday. Just about the only way to make sure it has cleared from the body completely is to quit for the entire racing season.


----------



## Ryder's

jimenaruiz said:


> What is crazy about all of this is the fact that there are entire sections within forums now devoted to the topic. When did we get to the point that professional athletes are using roids like a hound dog eats its' own poop. It is sad that this is becoming the example to children of how an athlete is allowed to behave. It isn't about using a substance for me as much as it is about cheating. Build your physical gifts naturally. Taking something to improve your performance instead of good old fashioned American hard work is just shameful.


The measure of a man's real character is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out. ~Thomas Babington Macaulay
People cheat. 
Husbands on wives, Wall Street titans, politicians, scrabble players, people who speed, it's part of human nature. I'm not surprised that some old guy would cheat his way to local fame and glory. It only reflects poorly on the old codgers morals and values and his weakness(s) as a human being. I'm not justifying the Dbag's motivations or actions but I'm not surprised .


----------



## JohnStonebarger

jimenaruiz said:


> ...Build your physical gifts naturally. Taking something to improve your performance instead of good old fashioned American hard work is just shameful.


If we're worried about the message that sends to kids, why is it okay for mom and dad to self medicate on everything from diet pills to ******? Plastic surgery? Sleeping pills? Cough syrup? Botox? And yet athletes should do it naturally?


----------



## JohnStonebarger

(deleted)


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> If we're worried about the message that sends to kids, why is it okay for mom and dad to self medicate on everything from diet pills to ******? Plastic surgery? Sleeping pills? Cough syrup? Botox? And yet athletes should do it naturally?


Cough Syrup is performance enhancing? 

so cheating at a bike race is the same as having fake boobies?


----------



## spade2you

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Cough Syrup is performance enhancing?
> 
> so cheating at a bike race is the same as having fake boobies?


If that's the case, the pron industry is a total fraud!


----------



## T K

spade2you said:


> If that's the case, the pron industry is a total fraud!


What? All those young hot chicks aren't really getting off with fat old dudes?


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Cough Syrup is performance enhancing?
> 
> so cheating at a bike race is the same as having fake boobies?


Close enough.

Does doping in cycling set a bad example for kids? Let's poll all the high school athletes on steroids and see what they think. Or the parents and coaches that arranged it for them. Presently, the predominant moral compass of the US points squarely at "Get Yours." Lie, steal, cheat, it's all good as long as it's white collar. And if you can take a pill to get what you want, you'd be stupid not to. No wonder the "anti-aging" trend is growing so fast.

We're greedy. That's "the American way." Doping doesn't conflict with some mythical work ethic here, it's as American as apple pie and the NFL.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> Close enough.
> 
> Does doping in cycling set a bad example for kids? Let's poll all the high school athletes on steroids and see what they think. Or the parents and coaches that arranged it for them. Presently, the predominant moral compass of the US points squarely at "Get Yours." Lie, steal, cheat, it's all good as long as it's white collar. And if you can take a pill to get what you want, you'd be stupid not to. No wonder the "anti-aging" trend is growing so fast.
> 
> We're greedy. That's "the American way." Doping doesn't conflict with some mythical work ethic here, it's as American as apple pie and the NFL.


You are confused. The crooks do not get to set the rules or the mores. 

Doping conflicts with fairness, equality, and many other values that the majority ascribe to.


----------



## stevesbike

you realize that this was the thesis of the documentary, Bigger, Stronger, Faster, which looked into the culture of doping and blamed it on American values? 

It's a pretty flimsy thesis - there were severe penalties for cheating in ancient Greece athletics, there are cheating scandals in Sumo wrestling, which is based on anceint Shinto rituals and it about as close an association between religion and sport there is. 

Besides, whether or not doping in masters racing is wrong or not doesnt depend on the message it sends kids. It's wrong because it violates the rules of the sport, plan and simple. 



JohnStonebarger said:


> Close enough.
> 
> Does doping in cycling set a bad example for kids? Let's poll all the high school athletes on steroids and see what they think. Or the parents and coaches that arranged it for them. Presently, the predominant moral compass of the US points squarely at "Get Yours." Lie, steal, cheat, it's all good as long as it's white collar. And if you can take a pill to get what you want, you'd be stupid not to. No wonder the "anti-aging" trend is growing so fast.
> 
> We're greedy. That's "the American way." Doping doesn't conflict with some mythical work ethic here, it's as American as apple pie and the NFL.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> predominant moral compass of the US points squarely at "Get Yours." Lie, steal, cheat, it's all good as long as it's white collar. And if you can take a pill to get what you want, you'd be stupid not to.


Which is why Armstrong, Bonds, Jones are such big heroes these days :idea:


----------



## nOOky

I have never really had that much concern over the pros doping. Obviously they are way out of my league, and as such it never factored into my results of my piddly little local races. I don't like people cheating, but it happens, and I think common knowledge is that it's all over in the pro ranks.

It does hit closer to home now that I'm an older guy. I think there are a lot more guys in their 40's doping now than when I was racing in my 20's. They have the money, the time, and still have the desire to win. Even though it may be a small local race, it still sux to get beat by a guy you are almost certain is using something, especially when he wasn't that good 20 years ago.

I'm glad they busted the old guy, I hope it deters more although I doubt the cheating mentality cares.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Doping conflicts with fairness, equality, and many other values that the majority ascribe to.


How so? 

To me this sounds like the car driver 10mph over the limit, drifting in and out of lanes and rolling through red lights, pausing their cell phone conversation just long enough to yell at a cyclist that they really should follow the rules of the road.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Which is why Armstrong, Bonds, Jones are such big heroes these days :idea:


I'm not defending doping. I don't dope. Never have, never will. That's more than I can confidently say about you or just about anyone else.

But the righteous indignation is a little silly when we allow and condone cheating all the time, don't you think?


----------



## JohnStonebarger

stevesbike said:


> you realize that this was the thesis of the documentary, Bigger, Stronger, Faster, which looked into the culture of doping and blamed it on American values?
> 
> It's a pretty flimsy thesis...


Is advancing over the center line wrong? It's against the rules, of course. Yet I see strong riders carefully violate the rule to their advantage all the time. More to the point, I never see anyone confront them for it. So... some cheating is okay then?

Once again, I don't condone doping in the least. I just find the moralizing about it to be a bit embarassing.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> I'm not defending doping. I don't dope. Never have, never will. That's more than I can confidently say about you or just about anyone else.
> 
> But the righteous indignation is a little silly when we allow and condone cheating all the time, don't you think?


The majority of the time we do not allow and condone cheating, we condemn it.


----------



## JustTooBig

JohnStonebarger said:


> Is advancing over the center line wrong? It's against the rules, of course. Yet I see strong riders carefully violate the rule to their advantage all the time. More to the point, I never see anyone confront them for it. So... some cheating is okay then?
> 
> Once again, I don't condone doping in the least. I just find the moralizing about it to be a bit embarassing.


Call me unconvinced. Drawing some kind of equivalency between traffic laws enacted for the purpose of public safety and rules put in place to ensure fair competition for racing? I don't see the parallel there, at least as it might apply to this discussion.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The majority of the time we do not allow and condone cheating, we condemn it.


Right. Just ask any NFL fan.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> Right. Just ask any NFL fan.


Ask Bill Belichick if people outside Boston cheer his cheating.

Bonds and Clemens left out of the HoF again today....yup, we love cheaters


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Ask Bill Belichick if people outside Boston cheer his cheating.
> 
> Bonds and Clemens left out of the HoF again today....yup, we love cheaters


We only care when they are caught. Most of the time NFL, NHL, NBA players are free to dope with impunity. Why wouldn't they? Fan and sports writer apathy is silent consent.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> We only care when they are caught. Most of the time NFL, NHL, NBA players are free to dope with impunity. Why wouldn't they? Fan and sports writer apathy is silent consent.


The majority of the public only know about it when they are caught. This may come as a surprise but most of the average public have limited knowledge of steroids.....but they do understand cheating, and they don't like it


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The majority of the public only know about it when they are caught. This may come as a surprise but most of the average public have limited knowledge of steroids.....but they do understand cheating, and they don't like it


Most fans know deep down that baseball has a steroid problem. Even if people didn't know, they don't want to know if sports are clean. They don't even want to think about it. 

Like I said, we only care when they are caught. So long as they're entertaining us with tomahawk dunks or hitting 300 home runs or throwing 90 punches a round for 12 rounds, nobody cares.


----------



## 32and3cross

Add to all that I once complained about a local racer that got caught (I also raced against LeDuc) only to have another racer inform me that the doper would have beat me even if he was clean. Maybe but really who the **** knows, we were both in the same breaks several times, things might have gone different if he had not been able to pull so hard I thought I was motorpacing. I think a lot of people don't really understand how cheaters alter the race.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> Most fans know deep down that baseball has a steroid problem. Even if people didn't know, they don't want to know if sports are clean. They don't even want to think about it.


As we have seen with Lance the ignorance of the casual fan can be staggering.


----------



## spade2you

Local Hero said:


> Like I said, we only care when they are caught. So long as they're entertaining us with tomahawk dunks or hitting 300 home runs or throwing 90 punches a round for 12 rounds, nobody cares.


We just want WINNERS and don't want dirty hands, which is fine I guess. How many people want Farrar to retire because he's a wimp/has been? 

It's a strange contrast with cycling fans who want Lance's head on a post vs. NFL fans who don't really seem to care.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

Doctor Falsetti said:


> As we have seen with Lance the ignorance of the casual fan can be staggering.


So the casual fan actually thinks sports are clean? Are you kidding? I can't tell if you actually believe this stuff or you're just stretching the truth to make a point.

Yes people can indulge in a ridiculous level of denial when it comes to their favorite celebrity (say, LA), and when that favorite is popped they are quickly forgiven (Belichik in New England). But over all we expect doped athletes, just as we expect cheating spouses and classmates, lying salesman, crooked politicians, dirty police, and molesting clergy. That alone is enough to make some of the chestbeating about PEDs seem over the top. When viewed alongside the all-American habit of quick fix consumerism (take a pill, get the lipo, whatever), it's clear that doping at all levels of sport = chickens coming home to roost.


----------



## foto

JohnStonebarger said:


> So the casual fan actually thinks sports are clean? Are you kidding? I can't tell if you actually believe this stuff or you're just stretching the truth to make a point.
> 
> Yes people can indulge in a ridiculous level of denial when it comes to their favorite celebrity (say, LA), and when that favorite is popped they are quickly forgiven (Belichik in New England). But over all we expect doped athletes, just as we expect cheating spouses and classmates, lying salesman, crooked politicians, dirty police, and molesting clergy. That alone is enough to make some of the chestbeating about PEDs seem over the top. When viewed alongside the all-American habit of quick fix consumerism (take a pill, get the lipo, whatever), it's clear that doping at all levels of sport = chickens coming home to roost.


Replace the word "we" with the word "I" and no one would be arguing with you. It may be hard to believe, but not everyone has such a cynical and miserable perspective on American society.


----------



## JohnStonebarger

foto said:


> Replace the word "we" with the word "I" ... not everyone has such a cynical and miserable perspective on American society.


Cynical and miserable? Guess again. 

I did dozens of races last year without losing any sleep over who would dope and who wouldn't. I worked to teach and support less experienced racers. I love the sport and I'm more involved in it than ever before. Best of all, I'm less miserable than I would be if I had to pretend.

Sorry to have disturbed you, I'll leave you to your lamenting.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

JohnStonebarger said:


> So the casual fan actually thinks sports are clean? Are you kidding? I can't tell if you actually believe this stuff or you're just stretching the truth to make a point.
> 
> Yes people can indulge in a ridiculous level of denial when it comes to their favorite celebrity (say, LA), and when that favorite is popped they are quickly forgiven (Belichik in New England). But over all we expect doped athletes, just as we expect cheating spouses and classmates, lying salesman, crooked politicians, dirty police, and molesting clergy. That alone is enough to make some of the chestbeating about PEDs seem over the top. When viewed alongside the all-American habit of quick fix consumerism (take a pill, get the lipo, whatever), it's clear that doping at all levels of sport = chickens coming home to roost.


You are assuming everyone thinks the same as you do, this is not the case. Most do not. Prior to USADA, and even Oprah, the majority of American's thought lance was clean. Most who cheered Bonds and McGuire had no idea they were doping, just like they did not know Carl Lewis or Marion Jones. 

While it is hard to make generalizations of 300 million people as a whole America does not celebrate cheating, we condemn it.


----------



## saird

Local Hero said:


> Can be done with or without doping.


Sportscar and hair plugs?


----------



## vagabondcyclist

32and3cross said:


> Add to all that I once complained about a local racer that got caught (I also raced against LeDuc) only to have another racer inform me that the doper would have beat me even if he was clean. Maybe but really who the **** knows, we were both in the same breaks several times, things might have gone different if he had not been able to pull so hard I thought I was motorpacing. *I think a lot of people don't really understand how cheaters alter the race.*


Exactly. Especially if there are dopers in Cat 5 and 4. They make the fitness curve seem too steep for some and they never come back. The fitness curve is plenty steep without the dopers making it even steeper. I'm not saying we need to "dumb down," just get rid of the ones who via PED are skewing things.


----------



## foto

JohnStonebarger said:


> Cynical and miserable? Guess again.





JohnStonebarger said:


> ...But over all we expect doped athletes, just as we expect cheating spouses and classmates, lying salesman, crooked politicians, dirty police, and molesting clergy. ...


No, I think I "guessed" correctly the first time...


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> While it is hard to make generalizations of 300 million people as a whole America does not celebrate cheating, we condemn it.


It's true, nobody likes it once they are caught. And many pay lip service to fighting doping. At the same time once all the phony outrage subsides there is silent consent; nobody really wants to work towards catching cheaters.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> It's true, nobody likes it once they are caught. And many pay lip service to fighting doping. At the same time once all the phony outrage subsides there is silent consent; nobody really wants to work towards catching cheaters.


You are confusing your feelings and actions with those of the larger group. 

The fact is the sport of cycling has changed massively over the last 10 years. Largely due to the efforts of those working to catch cheaters. The result has been a change in culture. 

Right now there a documentary on Riis running on Danish TV. One of his first lines is



> "Back then you were weird if you didn't dope. Nowadays, luckily, it's the other way around".


----------



## spade2you

Doctor Falsetti said:


> The fact is the sport of cycling has changed massively over the last 10 years. Largely due to the efforts of those working to catch cheaters. The result has been a change in culture.


Crack down on cheating and you simply create better cheaters. I'd like to think cycling is cleaner than something like the 2009 Giro, but I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

spade2you said:


> Crack down on cheating and you simply create better cheaters.


And fewer cheaters. 

I doubt the sport is like 1996


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are confusing your feelings and actions with those of the larger group.
> 
> The fact is the sport of cycling has changed massively over the last 10 years. Largely due to the efforts of those working to catch cheaters. The result has been a change in culture.


You confused cycling for sports in general. Just a moment ago we were talking about NFL, NHL, NBA, boxing, et cetera. In your preceding post you talked about 300 million Americans, the majority of whom are not cycling fans.


----------



## Local Hero

vagabondcyclist said:


> Exactly. Especially if there are dopers in Cat 5 and 4. They make the fitness curve seem too steep for some and they never come back. The fitness curve is plenty steep without the dopers making it even steeper. I'm not saying we need to "dumb down," just get rid of the ones who via PED are skewing things.


Is doping in Cat 5 a real concern?

This year I decide to give a little back to cycling. I'm mentoring in an early season training series. I mentored a Cat 5 crit last Sunday. 

A break went and the majority of the mentors stayed with the main field; I bridged solo to the small group that was about 30 seconds down the road. It was hard but not too hard. And I'm clean. If any of those jokers are doping they are doing it wrong. 

It's too bad there are no drugs that teach Cat 5 riders how to hold their line.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> You confused cycling for sports in general. Just a moment ago we were talking about NFL, NHL, NBA, boxing, et cetera. In your preceding post you talked about 300 million Americans, the majority of whom are not cycling fans.


You are confused. The majority of American's have zero understanding of how pervasive doping is in the NFL.


----------



## everything motorcycles

I find it kinda sad. He's risking his health...for what? I mean, low T shots would be 50 mg once a week? Month? This guy was doped hard.


----------



## Local Hero

Doctor Falsetti said:


> You are confused. The majority of American's have zero understanding of how pervasive doping is in the NFL.


The majority? 

The majority are not fans. Anyway. Sometimes it seems like you argue just to argue. 

The point I was making is that people care and spout outrage when athletes are caught. Nobody seems to care about the total lack of effective testing in American sports...thus we can assume that collectively people don't really care about the sports being clean. The fact that testing is a joke is silent consent.


----------



## bradkay

I would say that the average American sports fan likes to be blissfully unaware of doping in the big four sports. A few athletes like Barry Bonds made it hard to ignore their doping (his steroid use was pretty obvious after all) but for the most part the big four spectator sports in the US are very low key about going after PEDs. 

However, these same fans love to point out the "doping epidemic" in cycling - because it is a funny European sport where the biggest guy isn't always the best athlete (i.e., they can't understand the sport, so they like to make fun of it). It's a classic case of fan hypocrisy.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Local Hero said:


> The majority?
> 
> The majority are not fans. Anyway. Sometimes it seems like you argue just to argue.
> 
> The point I was making is that people care and spout outrage when athletes are caught. Nobody seems to care about the total lack of effective testing in American sports...thus we can assume that collectively people don't really care about the sports being clean. The fact that testing is a joke is silent consent.


Just pointing out the obvious, the vast majority of people have no idea of PED's. They are more interested in whatever dress Kim Kardashian is wearing


----------



## spade2you

Doctor Falsetti said:


> Just pointing out the obvious, the vast majority of people have no idea of PED's. They are more interested in whatever dress Kim Kardashian is wearing


I sincerely hope guys care more about football than the Kardashians. I don't even like football, but I'll give it more attention than the dang Kardashians.


----------



## foto

spade2you said:


> I sincerely hope guys care more about football than the Kardashians. I don't even like football, but I'll give it more attention than the dang Kardashians.


Why? Is football any more important? They're both the sameshit. Trash to keep the wool over your eyes as the oligarchy works to screw over the working man.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

spade2you said:


> I sincerely hope guys care more about football than the Kardashians. I don't even like football, but I'll give it more attention than the dang Kardashians.


You should read what I actually wrote.


----------



## spade2you




----------



## aclinjury

spade2you said:


> I sincerely hope guys care more about football than the Kardashians. I don't even like football, but I'll give it more attention than the dang Kardashians.


Kim, when she was younger, had racks and booty to die for. 
Now, not so much, but I still would not say "no"


----------



## stevesbike

this thread was about an amateur 62 year old (and a 52 year old in SoCal) who systematically doped, won dozens of state, national, and a world championship and were caught the first and only time they were tested. It's not about pro cycling, the NFL, MLB, or the culture of cheating in the USA. 

It's about guys who defraud people who wake up early to train, ride in the dark, pay their own $ on entry fees, get up at the crack of dawn to drive 3 hours for a 45 minute crit, etc.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

stevesbike said:


> this thread was about an amateur 62 year old (and a 52 year old in SoCal) who systematically doped, won dozens of state, national, and a world championship and were caught the first and only time they were tested. It's not about pro cycling, the NFL, MLB, or the culture of cheating in the USA.
> 
> It's about guys who defraud people who wake up early to train, ride in the dark, pay their own $ on entry fees, get up at the crack of dawn to drive 3 hours for a 45 minute crit, etc.


This :thumbsup:


----------



## JohnStonebarger

stevesbike said:


> this thread was about an amateur 62 year old (and a 52 year old in SoCal) who systematically doped, won dozens of state, national, and a world championship and were caught the first and only time they were tested. It's not about pro cycling, the NFL, MLB, or the culture of cheating in the USA.
> 
> It's about guys who defraud people who wake up early to train, ride in the dark, pay their own $ on entry fees, get up at the crack of dawn to drive 3 hours for a 45 minute crit, etc.


I'd add that apparently this thread is for people who see doping in amateur cycling as somehow the exception rather than the rule, and that people who disagree are decidedly not welcome.

I've been racing for 15 years and I have never doped. But since that doesn't qualify me to have an opinion on the matter, I'll leave you and Doctor Falsetti to your hand wringing.


----------



## T K

I for one would like to see some random testing done at local races or testing some suspected riders. Too many show up and race week after week knowing they'll never get tested. Maybe a tester showing up would get rid of some of these guys. Refuse to test, USA cycling pulls your license for a year.
I know of one guy in particular here in No. Cal. that people would like to see gone.


----------



## digibud

I'll admit to juicing before some competitions. don't think I would have had much chance of placing anywhere without it and as for the health implications I'm not terribly concerned. Luckily for me none of the tests show up either carrots or beets and I find them quite helpful. I'm giving EPO a try tonight (Eggplant, Parmesan cheese and Onions).


----------



## Fireform

T K said:


> I for one would like to see some random testing done at local races or testing some suspected riders. Too many show up and race week after week knowing they'll never get tested. Maybe a tester showing up would get rid of some of these guys. Refuse to test, USA cycling pulls your license for a year.
> I know of one guy in particular here in No. Cal. that people would like to see gone.


There's always the tip line:

http://www.usada.org/playclean


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

Fireform said:


> There's always the tip line:
> 
> http://www.usada.org/playclean


This tip line works. There was a masters racer in Florida who was bragging about all the dope he was taking. Somebody called the tip line and USAC sent a tester to the race. He either tested positive or refused to give a sample, can't remember, but he got a 2 year ban


----------



## vagabondcyclist

T K said:


> I for one would like to see some random testing done at local races or testing some suspected riders. Too many show up and race week after week knowing they'll never get tested. Maybe a tester showing up would get rid of some of these guys. Refuse to test, USA cycling pulls your license for a year.
> I know of one guy in particular here in No. Cal. that people would like to see gone.


If you're local association isn't participating in USA Cycling's RaceClean program, ask them why they aren't. USA Cycling is providing matching funds and part of your race registrations, etc. go to your local association. If you're on a race team, talk to your team/club president.


----------



## Fireform

Doctor Falsetti said:


> This tip line works. There was a masters racer in Florida who was bragging about all the dope he was taking. Somebody called the tip line and USAC sent a tester to the race. He either tested positive or refused to give a sample, can't remember, but he got a 2 year ban


If it's who I'm thinking of he tested positive. He'd have a lot of company if there were more testing.


----------



## T K

Fireform said:


> If it's who I'm thinking of he tested positive. He'd have a lot of company if there were more testing.


Yep. Most people don't want to be a narc, snitch, tattle tale, or look like sour grapes. More random testing at local races would be welcome by all, except the cheats of course.


----------



## spade2you

T K said:


> Yep. Most people don't want to be a narc, snitch, tattle tale, or look like sour grapes. More random testing at local races would be welcome by all, except the cheats of course.


Why? If we REALLY want to keep things clean, you can't just let it continue to happen. I might beg a team mate to stop. The competition is fair game.


----------



## everything motorcycles

"Snitching" isn't the way to go. One person slinging accusations is unacceptable. Who's going to pay for "local" race testing??? It's the honor system on the local level. You can accuse all you want, but better to be able to provide proof as that is slander. 



T K said:


> Yep. Most people don't want to be a narc, snitch, tattle tale, or look like sour grapes. More random testing at local races would be welcome by all, except the cheats of course.


----------



## Fireform

I don't see it that way. If someone "snitches" on me and I get tested, I'll be able to post my clean test on teh face books. Win win.


----------



## everything motorcycles

Who's going to pay for that test? You are ok with others saying 'test him, and test him, and test him'?


----------



## Fireform

everything motorcycles said:


> Who's going to pay for that test? You are ok with others saying 'test him, and test him, and test him'?


Why not? They can test me every day for all I care. My masters fees are supposed to cover some testing, so test already.


----------



## spade2you

everything motorcycles said:


> Who's going to pay for that test?


Lance Armstrong?


----------



## everything motorcycles

Fireform said:


> Why not? They can test me every day for all I care. My masters fees are supposed to cover some testing, so test already.



I hear ya about you willing to be tested, but reality is...your fees likely won't cover 'real' testing. If you are doing Pro racing I suggest they always check top 2 or 3. That's simple.


----------



## thumper8888

The so-called "snitching" is vital. In the areas where the state associations are working with the USADA and USA Cycling in the grass roots testing program, the testing works like this: The testers show up at two random events (more if the local association is willing to pay more), unannounced. They hit some folks on the podium, but then also reach down into the field for a few more. Those picked from the field, it has been said elsewhere, are random, but that's not always the case: they may target those riders they've gotten believable tips on.
Five callers drop a dime on the same guy, it's going to get USADA's attention.
The tips, if seemingly believable, may also result in out-of-competition testing, which is much, much more crucial. The vast majority of dopers know how long their drug of choice works in the system, and when they show up for a race it won't be present in their bodies.


----------



## everything motorcycles

So if not in their system, what's the point to test them...5 so called snitchers can easily be orchestrated from disgruntled rivals. Yeah, if they random do it on the podium and it's out of their system so be it.

I don't think at local level you can or should do much more. Heck they busted this guy! Don't wanna get too detailed, but pretty sure even the likable Kroom(?) and all are still using, just not getting caught. It's near impossible for these guys to be at this level without doing it. However, I believe a buy like Lemond didn't use. But that was a different error. Much less $$$ involved.


----------



## thumper8888

everything motorcycles said:


> So if not in their system, what's the point to test them...5 so called snitchers can easily be orchestrated from disgruntled rivals. Yeah, if they random do it on the podium and it's out of their system so be it.
> 
> I don't think at local level you can or should do much more. Heck they busted this guy! Don't wanna get too detailed, but pretty sure even the likable Kroom(?) and all are still using, just not getting caught. It's near impossible for these guys to be at this level without doing it. However, I believe a buy like Lemond didn't use. But that was a different error. Much less $$$ involved.


You don't understand how doping works. It's MORE likely to be in their system out of competition, when they're training. That's when they are using it for recovering without regard to whether they might be tested. If they're going to be in a major race, most of them know how many days in advance to stop doping so that it wont be in their system when tested. And the scenario of five snitches being orchestrated from their disgruntled rivals makes no sense. If they have good information, fine, the guy gets popped... If they don't and call in saying this guy they dont like is doping when they don't know that, NO ONE LOSES ANYTHING. Some innocent schmo has to piss in a cup. Big deal. Doenst hurt him in any way.


----------



## everything motorcycles

lol, I know extremely well how doping works, especially testing. The guy got busted because he didn't think he was going to get tested. He took no 'precautions'. Best use of drugs is being ON them while competing. 

Yeah, easier to 'get away with it' buy being clean for the events. They didn't catch Lance and they'd show up in his home, his trips etc. You are giving 'testing' way too much credit.

Random and Podium testing is probably the best thing you can do. You are fighting an uphill battle. I'd rather be racing a guy who is drugged during training and clean during races then visa versa.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just trying to point out it is very difficult proposition to catch ya!


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

everything motorcycles said:


> They didn't catch Lance and they'd show up in his home, his trips etc.


For most of his first career Armstrong was tested 1-2 times per year OOC. He got advanced notice of these "Surprise" tests and was able to avoid several of them. During the comeback he was tested often, building a profile that showed he was transfusing in 2009.


----------



## everything motorcycles

Doctor Falsetti said:


> For most of his first career Armstrong was tested 1-2 times per year OOC. He got advanced notice of these "Surprise" tests and was able to avoid several of them. During the comeback he was tested often, building a profile that showed he was transfusing in 2009.


He passed ALL tests


----------



## Fireform

everything motorcycles said:


> He passed ALL tests


You're late to this party.


----------



## 3DKiwi

everything motorcycles said:


> He passed ALL tests


Maybe at the time but subsequent tests showed he was doping:

Cycling: Lance Armstrong failed four drugs tests in 1999, UCI admits - Others - More Sports - The Independent

In Tyler Hamilton's 'The Secret Race" book it mentions irregularities with some of Armstrongs doping tests. Armstrong used his influence and the problems went away.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti

everything motorcycles said:


> He passed ALL tests


Nope. 3 positives for Test, 4 for Cortisone, 2 for EPO,......and of course the 6 positives for EPO from the 99 Tour. 

The EPO test came out in mid 2000. These days WADA would have retro tested his 99 samples and he would have been out, just like they did with CERA. The UCI did nothing but cover it up.

I thought you said you "Know extremely well how doping works" ?


----------



## everything motorcycles

If it was a cover up so be it. What does that have to do with Knowledge of Testing? I won't divulge my knowledge in regards to testing, but it is not difficult to beat the tests. 

I'm not as familiar obviously with Lance as you are. My basic knowledge was that they had multiple whislte blowers with the same stories, and only then did he come 'clean' (pun intended). 

His samples as far as I knew came back clean...but what you are stating is they did not. So, while I may not know Lance's situation (again, haven't read where his tests came back positive, but taking your word out of lack of interest)...but yes "Know extremely well" how it works.

FYI, there is an extremely new masking agent that is nearly impossible to detect...as of now! Its several months out, but look for some big rumblings in the next several months!


----------



## everything motorcycles

Mr Alexender says it best here...def in layman's terms!

How Armstrong Could 'Get Away With Stuff With Everybody Looking' | Playbook | Wired.com


----------



## den bakker

everything motorcycles said:


> If it was a cover up so be it. What does that have to do with Knowledge of Testing? I won't divulge my knowledge in regards to testing, but it is not difficult to beat the tests.
> 
> I'm not as familiar obviously with Lance as you are. My basic knowledge was that they had multiple whislte blowers with the same stories, and only then did he come 'clean' (pun intended).
> 
> His samples as far as I knew came back clean...but what you are stating is they did not. So, while I may not know Lance's situation (again, haven't read where his tests came back positive, but taking your word out of lack of interest)...but yes "Know extremely well" how it works.
> 
> FYI, there is an extremely new masking agent that is nearly impossible to detect...as of now! Its several months out, but look for some big rumblings in the next several months!


this is one cool story bro.


----------

