John":db5ld7sh said:
Interesting that many of us have chosen riders from the same era, must be something about retrobikes key demographic.....
Also intersted that people are going to be cheering for Millar after his, ahem, extra curricular activites.
I agree that my enthusiasm for DM has been tainted by scandal but...
Drugs in cycling are a sad fact, Tom Simpson being the perfect example of how endemic and time honoured it is.
I do not want to re hash the endless did he didn't he debate.
Lemond, Merckx, Armstrong, Hinault, Fingnon. They all may or may not have doped. Their acheivment still stands. The sad thing is if no one doped then they probably would have won on their merits and not had to defend anything.
I think that there is nothing to be gained by hushing up EPO et all and making it a taboo subject.
David has paid his dues. He has the hardest task now ahead, to win and prove the critics wrong. I will be cheering him along at every stroke of the crank and I'm sure he will do well.
Another thing. The very sad suicides of some pro's in the '90's (RMO's Thierry Claveyrolat being one of the saddest) may or may not be attributable to guilt / low esteem over past doping, or worse, long term mental heath dammage caused by doping. No one is willing to mention this as it would destroy these rider's image in the history of the sport. This is a shame as if a link could be proven then it would make the case for doping even weaker.
In Cycle Sport magazine this month Tom Steels (I think) said that there was a new generation of riders coming up for whom to dope would be unthinkable. I hope he is right but I fear more 'revelations' until then.
Sorry to raise this subject but openenss it the only way to crack it.