|
|
Category Archives
August 25, 2005
Posted by Nick
I've been getting a ton of interesting feedback on the discussion about Lance and PE-drugs. I see Lance will be on Larry King tonight to defend himself so we'll hear more from him. But I'd like to clear up a few misconceptions about something I wrote. Given some of the criticism, you would think I had claimed I saw needles sticking out of Lance's butt on the l'Alp D'Huez.
Lance won six Tours under the tighter testing regime. The question of this first Tour is opened by this report. Fine. No one will ever truly know his guilt or innocence. Ever. But the same goes for Raffy Palmeiro, who still says he never knowingly took any banned substance and hardly anyone believes him anymore.
And this gets at the larger point. To think more clearly about these issues, I think it's helpful to imagine that Lance is guilty. His guilt, if he is guilty, does nothing to diminish his greatness in my view. I am a maniacal Lance fan. It's in part because of this that I feel so strongly it helps to assume he's guilty. Because doing so helps demonstrate the preposterousness of how we currently view PE-drugs.
It's plainly evident that lots of PE-drugs can be used by athletes under doctor supervision safely and effectively without jeopardizing their health. We can't wish away that fact. Lance used EPO under doctor's orders for chemo. The skiing giant Herman Maier claims that he has training techniques that mimic the effect of EPO, without taking EPO. Given these facts, maybe we should rethink how we view PE-drugs: not all PE-drugs are alike.
The problem for athletes, as I've pointed out in earlier posts, is the prisoner's dilemma. Under the current state of affairs, no athlete can be perfectly sure other athletes aren't taking banned drugs, so even if they don't want to, they might be tempted to take drugs. In my view, there's only one way around this, and that's for the athletes to take control of matters. The athletes are in the best position to decide what's OK to take and what's not OK. As such, the athletes should determine which PE-drugs and substances are OK to use and which PE-drugs aren't. Once that list is determined, insist on rigorous random testing. One violation means banishment... for life.
The virtue of this approach is two-fold: the potential for greater honesty and effectiveness. It's more honest in the sense that it appreciates some substances are safe to use under doctor's supervision and some aren't. It holds greater potential for effectiveness in that athletes become the arbiters of what's OK to take, and then they have no choice but to be comfortable with a strict enforcement regime since they've made the detemination of what's OK and what's not.
My problem with the current state of affairs is that it screws Lance. Since the current state of affairs is so out of synch with a realistic cost-benefit analysis, no one will ever enjoy the presumption of innocence. So I'd prefer we imagine he's guilty, change how we think about PE-drugs, and make sensible changes to PE-drug policy.
Comments (1)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
August 24, 2005
Posted by Nick
By now everyone knows Lance Armstrong has been accused -- again -- of doping, this time using EPO during his 1999 Tour win, the first of his seven straight. Obviously more details could come out, but this strikes me as much ado about nothing. It's based on a 'b' urine* sample, and the paper breaking the story has a history of questionable allegations about Lance.
But did he do it? TG is inclined to think he did. For starters, during that season there was no reliable test for EPO, and it appears lots of cyclists were using it. Lance had used the substance before during his chemo under doctors' orders. So it seems to me, despite his denial, he might well have used it at the time. Sorry, Lance, call it the Raffy monkey on your -- and every jock's -- back.
My willingness to think Lance is lying points to a larger problem of how we presently view PE-drugs and sports. A substance like EPO has legitimate medical uses, as Lance knows from his chemo. Steroids have other legitimate uses, from helping AIDS patients to helping folks like my brother who recently took 'the clear' to treat poison ivy. When jocks know they can use something safely and effectively in another capacity, it's difficult to believe they won't use it for a competitive edge in sports when they know they can use it without compromising their health.
One thing this debate over PE-drugs has lacked from the beginning is any serious weighing of costs and benefits of various substances. Until that happens -- and don't expect it to with Dick Pound and others on the hunt -- you can expect these gotcha games to continue across the sports world. And the denials, and suspicion, to pile up.
*(Ed. note: An earlier version of this post said 'blood' sample where it was a urine sample).
Comments (32)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 24, 2005
Posted by Nick
Lance wins his seventh. Hats off to him. The LATimes looks at his legacy.
Competitors credit him with changing the way riders approach the world’s most famous bike race. His focus on technology and the intensity of his training have helped propel the sport at a time when it was battered by drug scandals. Even Armstrong is not immune to accusations, though he has never failed a doping test.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 20, 2005
Posted by Nick
As Lance makes his way to winning Lucky 7, here's an interesting look at how the US adopted technology -- including air conditioning! -- and broke with tradition to emerge on top of the cycling world.
Cycling is a deeply European sport, and it is governed by a multitude of traditions and customs that don’t necessarily have any connection to performance.
For instance, until very recently, team directors and even some team doctors believed that air conditioning in cars and hotel rooms was bad for riders.
I never really understood their rationale, but it had something to do with the idea that cool air led to respiratory infections.
As a result, exhausted riders were told to sleep in hot and stuffy hotel rooms, and since they didn’t get a good night’s sleep, they rode poorly due to lack of rest.
The relatively short history of American cyclists in the European peloton has worked to our advantage. When we arrived on the continent in the 1980s, we immediately started questioning the customs and traditions we found.
We weren’t trying to be disrespectful, but it seemed odd to work so hard trying to win races only to be hindered by practices that existed because “that’s how it’s always been done.”
American riders were more open to new technologies for training and competition, and that has played a large role in their successes over the past 20 years.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 10, 2005
Posted by Nick
The New York Times has an interesting piece about how American bike technology and manufacturing have left the Europeans in the dust:
Adding insult to injury, after decades as trend-setters, European bicycle manufacturers now find themselves copying America's mountain-bike-influenced style.
The role reversal surprises even some in the industry.
"You can't go to Italy and tell them how to make leather goods in a new way or how to run their fashion industry," said Richard Sachs, who builds bicycles by hand at his shop in Chester, Conn. "Yet with bikes, the Italians and everyone else in Europe caved in to the American designs."
Yves Blanc, the editor in chief of Le Cycle, a French magazine that only printed its first review of an American bicycle in 1992, credits Cannondale, which is based in Bethel, Conn., with spurring the interest in American designs. Seeing little room for growth in mountain bike sales, Cannondale looked to the European road bike market during the mid-1990's.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 09, 2005
Posted by Nick
Nanotech gets results:
BMC, the Swiss high-tech bicycle brand, and Easton Sports have developed the “Pro Machine” for the Tour de France with a frame made from carbon nanotechnology.
My hope is nanotech will make huge contributions to materials science, revolutionizing things like transportation. It's good to see it's making an impact in the sports realm.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 07, 2005
Posted by Nick
Interesting piece on bike tech and Le Tour:
Armstrong and several teammates traveled to the Allied Aerospace Low Speed Wind Tunnel to train. AMD-processor-powered systems at the San Diego facility helped the riders learn proper positioning to limit wind resistance.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 05, 2005
Posted by Nick
Slate has a few interesting articles on the Tour, including ways to Lance-proof the Tour:
Make the mountains count: There are seven mountain stages this year, but only three of them finish on climbs, where the contenders generally ditch the pretenders. (Pay special attention to Stage 10 on July 12 and Stage 14 on July 16.) Compared to those used in other European cycling races, French mountain roads aren't all that steep. The ballyhooed Alpe d'Huez, which is absent from this year's race, averages less than an 8 percent grade. It's a handicap-access ramp compared to Spain's dreaded Angliru, which kicks up to 23 percent, and Italy's Colle delle Finestre, whose last five miles are unpaved. The solution: quantity over quality. Put mountain stages in the first week. And there are undoubtedly still a few dirt mountain roads in France—the organizers should have the daring to use one.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
July 26, 2004
Posted by Nick
Marginal Revolution is the best blog not part of the Corante group. If you read no other blog, read Marginal Revolution and you will be smarter.
Anyway, the folks there say part of Lance's genius is he's a damn-fine game theorist:
Armstrong's victory in the Tour de France is a testament to his awesome physical skills but he and his team should also be credited with a sound understanding of game theory. Game theory arises in the tour because it's important to take advantage of the draft created by riders in front. The dynamics of draft alone are fairly simple but add to this that the leader is not necessarily winning, the use of teams, the many stages, the different terrain etc. and you have a very complex strategic space.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
Posted by Nick
Richard Virenque, who won the King of the Mountain title at this year's Tour de France, says one of Lance's big advantages is superior technology:
Armstrong has also benefited from his team's attention to technology to reduce drag. "He leaves nothing to chance, from his helmet to the forks on his bike," said Richard Virenque, this year's "King of the Mountains,"(the best mountain climber on the tour - the seventh year in row)on French TV Saturday. "He is light years ahead of us" in technology.
I haven't seen the numbers comparing them, but I have to imagine other teams spend as much as USPS on technology and training. It's not like F1 where Ferrari is so much more dominant in terms of cash than its rivals. So while I've no doubt Lance has every state-of-the-art tech advance he wants, I'm skeptical it gives him a huge advantage. As he demonstrated in the last six stages, he's just far and away the strongest rider in the Tour.
Comments (0)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
February 18, 2004
Posted by Nick
Cycling legend Marco Pantani's autopsy reveals:
...the cyclist suffered a heart attack following severe swelling of the heart and brain. The pathologist's report, which refused to draw any firm conclusions, also said the Italian had lung damage.
"Two elements have emerged, bleeding in the brain and lungs. At this point we can exclude violence," Dr Giuseppe Fortuni said on Monday.
"The investigations will take weeks. We can't rule out any cause of death."
This is sad and has the potential to turn the cycling world upside down.
Comments (1)
+ TrackBacks (0) | Category: Cycling
|
|
|
| |
