- HOT TOPICS:
- An American start for the Giro? •
- 2010 Routes: Giro | California | TdF •
- LA doc guilty on all counts
Landis, lifetime bans and mere mortals' tires
Do you want to contribute to Mailbag, a regular feature of VeloNews.com? Here's how:
● Keep it short. And remember that we reserve the right to edit for grammar, length and clarity.
● Include your full name, hometown and state or nation.
● Send it to webletters@insideinc.com.
On or off the fence
Editor,
It is unfortunate that Mr. Darcy (in the Oct. 24 Mailbag) feels the need to say those who disagree with him are "morally bankrupt." This seems to reflect the tenor of the times where we people can't come to different conclusions without disrespect.
Mr. Darcy misstates a number of points regarding the Landis defense. Landis' position has always been that he didn't do what he is accused of, and he has been trying to find out why the tests have reported incorrect results. In particular, his defense team has never agreed that the second type of tests (IRMS) can't produce false positives. Here, Mr. Darcy puts words in Landis' mouth.
The IRMS test is complicated and subject to many possible errors and interpretations that can lead to erroneous conclusions. At the same time, the WADA Code's adjudication procedures are not designed to reveal such errors, but to find the accused guilty. When riders are caught literally red-handed or confess, this is not at issue. There is no doubt that much doping does occur, and that most reported results are correct. Problems arise when someone who may be innocent of the charge
runs into the stone wall of The Code, and the circled wagons of agencies protecting their own interests.
The Italian Association's call for life bans is well intentioned, but may be problematic given the fairness and due process problems inherent in the WADA Code. It is not helpful for those who want harsh penalties to label those interested in fairness and transparency of the enforcement as "doping apologists" who are "morally bankrupt." It ought to be possible for us to agree that doping is a continuing problem in many sports, and that we should have a trustworthy enforcement mechanism.
As to whether the current enforcement systems in cycling are trustworthy, it is probably fair to say that nobody is happy.
David Brower,
Alamo, California
More on lifetime bans
Editor,
I find the position of those calling for a lifetime ban in cycling doping cases interesting. Whenever ideas such as that are proposed I like to consider what if that approach was applied to other similar situations and see if it still sounds like a good idea. So with that in mind think about some other scenarios that involve breaking the rules and the likely outcome of enforcing such a policy on them:
If someone is caught cheating on exams in college they should be banned from further higher education until the day they die.
If someone is caught driving under the influence they should loose their driving privileges for life on the first offense.
If someone is found to have lied to their spouse they should never be allowed to marry again.
The common theme you might notice is that all of these actions wind up being punitive in the extreme. Ask yourself, is the punishment proportional to the crime? Because that position is saying the offense was so grievous that such person should never be allowed a chance at higher knowledge, to drive, seek happiness in a relationship, or race a bicycle ever again. Personally, I can only see the possibility of drunk driving as an offense worth considering so serious because of the deadly potential of the misdeed.
I understand some of us have had our feelings hurt by a sense of betrayal from someone we looked up to. The fact is that people are human and make mistakes. We are the ones who placed these racers on the pedestal. But does that give us the right to take away their entire future when they fall short of our expectations? Try to keep some perspective, it's just a bicycle race. And consider to some it is their lifeline to making something out of their life - let's not forget the outcome with Mr. Pantani.
I wish not to live in a society so oppressive that one error forever precludes a chance at redemption. Those proposing a lifetime ban perhaps need to remove the beam from their own eye first.
Rick C Johnson,
Bend, Oregon
On wheels and tires
Editor,
I read with some amazement the recent discussion of which tire brand was best, tubulars vs. clinchers, and all the microscopic analysis of one against the other.
Whenever I watch a race on tv, or if I'm lucky, in person, I notice that while every rider starts out on his team's wheels and tires, at some point in a race, many riders need to switch a front or rear wheel to neutral support provided wheels.
Now unless Mavic is carrying a duplicate version of every team's wheels and tires (and in some cases an individual rider's setup), the riders get what Mavic provides, and they finish on those wheels. So now a rider is riding on different wheels, and different tires. Any particular advantage of one setup against another is lost, and further, I imagine there are some handling issues on descents, tight corners, etc.
Or maybe it really doesn't matter. While we here in the mortal realm can quibble over whether one tire deforms more or less over irregularities in the road surface, the big boys are doing just fine on whatever wheel and tire setup they happen to have when the going gets tough. It is after all the motor on the bike, not the bike.
Marty Evans,
Hercules, California
