Past is always better?

First topic message reminder :

Why is past always better in boxing?

Every other sport moves on but too many people read opinions of old farts who are too biased to give any credit to modern athletes.

Suppose it happens in all sports to a degree but it is serious in boxing.

Mayweather would need to stay undefeated for another 20 years and maybe win titles up to heavyweight for some on here to rate him top 50..
AdamT


Posts: 798
Join date: 2014-03-27





.

the discussion seems to have veered somewhat from the original point, but for what it's worth:

- Strongy is, as far as I know, correct on Armstrong. The way he organised systemic doping is something that just wasn't present in other teams (including Festina, Telecom, etc.). Also worth mentioning that he basically bullied any rider who tried to speak out against the doping culture out of the sport (as well as ruining a few other people's lives along the way). For Armstrong the sportsman, I have nothing but contempt. Strongy is also right that without drugs Armstrong wasn't a stand-out cyclist from a physiological viewpoint. For instance, Tyler Hamilton had much better hermatocrit levels (before taking EPO). The book Hamilton wrote with Simon Walsh called "The Secret Race" is a very worthy read on all this subject, I fully recommend it.

- for all that, I do have a lot of respect for Armstrong's charity work.

- on Froome/Nibali, it's a bit murkier. They're a few indications that Froome could be clean: his performance levels are just within what's possible (perhaps not plausible, but possible), he has and had off-days (you never saw Armstrong have to retire from the Tour for instance, Hamilton famously rode most of one with a broken collarbone and still finished in the top 7 or so), his team also have their bad days (Porte's had a few disasters). If Sky are guilty of systemic doping, they're doing a fine job of murkying the waters. Nibali is a little tougher, due to the sheer ease with which he won without ever being challenged, and of course the fact that he rides for a team which is, let's say, not exactly white. Against that is the fact that his biggest competitors weren't riding against him last year, so you'd arguably expect him to smash Peraud, Pinot and Valverde. He's also, unlike Froome, consistenly finished high up through the age groups, suggesting that if he is doping he's been doing so for a while.

- on the balance of things, cycling is probably one of the cleanest sports at the moment. It may have been by necessity, but they've undoubtedly done and continue to do more to catch the cheats than nearly all other sports. Marion Jones for instance never failed a drugs test (or at least we never heard about it if she did...).

- which brings me to Bolt. There are good physiological reasons for him running very fast, but it is difficult to believe in it when every athlete having run sub 9.9 has at some point tested positive for something (I think), while this guy is running sub 9.6: just seems difficult to accept. I do believe that unless athletics faces scandals similar to those faced by cycling the chances are we'll never hear about a positive test for Bolt if it happens.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Froome and Nibali have approached the superhuman levels but are still within what is generally accepted as being possible clean. Until there is any proof that either are doping which I don't think they are anyway i'll continue to believe they're clean.

There's a lot written by those who don't have full access to the biological passports so they're not in the best position to pass judgement much like Kimmage no longer is. The unfortunate reality is that his book was a contributing factor to all this, teams wised up about the system and found more elaborate and fail proof ways of evading it.

Kimmage was ostracized when he wrote Rough Ride. As he said himself nobody wanted to know about doping not the riders or the cycling authorities. Kimmage said the phrase used to describe him was "The man who spat in his own soup". What caused the biggest problem was EPO which was a 90's phenomenon which came after Kimmage's book. The deaths due to thickening of the blood and the stopping of the sleeping heart brought the spotlight on which was compounded by the Festina affair.

With current sports science it is very easy to measure today's performances and compare them to the performances from the EPO era. During last years TdeF I read the reports coming out from different statisticians and physiologists comparing Nibali's performance to the superhuman performances of the EPO era. The results fueled a lot of speculation of doping. He was achieving the power output of a doper.

Time will tell as the drive to win will create the conditions were the performances need to become so good they will superhuman. It's a delicate balances for the cheats, do enough to win but don't do anything too sparkling.

Nibali is an odd one for me, when he produced those levels for all intents and purposes he wasn't competing against anyone so it was rather odd and I did lose interest in the tour last year. He unlike Froome the year before wasn't having off days and was blitzing every single mountain stage.

What would have been really useful is if the Operacion Puerto blood was tested but the Spanish were far too worried about the implications it had against their top cyclists to allow that to happen. The moment the name Contador appeared you knew that was never going to happen and i'm sure we would all like to know what's been going on at Astana.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:
What would have been really useful is if the Operacion Puerto blood was tested but the Spanish were far too worried about the implications it had against their top cyclists sportsmen to allow that to happen. The moment the name Contador appeared you knew that was never going to happen and i'm sure we would all like to know what's been going on at Astana.

Fixed that for you... Rumour has it that their world-beating football team would have been more than a bit implicated, as well as the odd tennis player...

I lost all respect for Lance Armstrong when it was proven he was a cheat. Not only the biggest cheat ever pretty much, but he destroyed the lives of anyone who stood in his way. One of the worst sportsmen of all time. As for his charity, plenty of wealthy people donate to charity and in Armstrongs case I think it was just a way to cover up his guilt and cheating by trying to appear like he was a good guy when really he was a disgraceful cheat. Thank God they caught him in the end is all I will say. Not sure how anyone can defend him.

I binged on Armstrong documentaries a few months ago. I find him a fascinating and terrifying character. Lots of mentions about biographies on this thread, can anyone recommend a book on the subject?

I wouldn't say I'm particularly interested in cycling as a subject so anything with a heavy emphasis on the science of cycling would probably go over my head, more interested in the human aspect of this story. The investigations, cover ups, abuse of power etc.

In the aftermath of the LA case, there was a thread on cycling forum giving ten reasons for why Lance Armstrong is still a hero. Think #1 or 2 was "He's American"... Three guesses for guesses for guessing who wrote it... you'll probably only need one.

The thread was....Ten reasons why Armstrong is still a hero to me.....It was quite popular as I recall...

Being American was number 2...

Then again he won't get a State funeral like Hansie Cronje.......

Hansie didn't get a State funeral... Or even a provincial one. It only looked at that way because Afrikaans stronghold Bloemfontein has a lot of deep pocketed people who would probably have written "ten reasons why Hansie is still a hero to me" had forums like this existed en mass then, probably replace #2 with Afrikaans and it would probably be a copy paste of your thread. Much like Lance Armstrong, just criticising the guy publicly got you kicked out of the Afrikaner social circle. The Hansie love was hero worshipping dialled up to about 11, but not particularly surprising.

Ten reasons why Armstrong is still a hero to me

Very much the ignorant American way to support a drugs cheat. Not to mention one that bought himself and his sport in to a level of disrepute never seen before. Forget Johnson, the East Germans etc... Never did one person/team constantly deny and ruin lives of others in libel cases.

Hero's are people you aspire to be like. Says a lot about you Truss.

Coxy001 wrote:

Ten reasons why Armstrong is still a hero to me

Very much the ignorant American way to support a drugs cheat. Not to mention one that bought himself and his sport in to a level of disrepute never seen before. Forget Johnson, the East Germans etc... Never did one person/team constantly deny and ruin lives of others in libel cases.

Hero's are people you aspire to be like. Says a lot about you Truss.

As Americans like to say ............"The biggest and the best"................Armstrong was the biggest and best

drug cheat who ever lived by a country mile.

What do Irish people say ??

Have to wait for some achievers to come a long before we find out.....I guess !!

Can we not do the 'my countries better than your country' please team? Steffan will only put that daffodil on his head and embarrass me !

We all know the UK's better Dipper, it's why Truss moved over here

Derbymanc wrote:We all know the UK's better Dipper, it's why Truss moved over here

Sold out.................That's why I came here..

Dipper Brown wrote:Can we not do the 'my countries better than your country' please team? Steffan will only put that daffodil up his bum and embarrass me !

Fixed that for ya!!!!!!!

In my mind Truss is from Rotherham, harbours a strange obsession for all things American and makes everyone call him Tex!

Strongback, don't know what to make of you at times you cheeky scamp!

Cheers Dave.

Dipper Brown wrote:In my mind Truss is from Rotherham, harbours a strange obsession for all things American and makes everyone call him Tex!

Strongback, don't know what to make of you at times you cheeky scamp!

Rotherham is that in Yorkshire ??