Quote:
Originally Posted by BIGTYMER
And best cyclist ever? He may have never won if he didn't dope.
It's a dirty sport but that doesn't make it ok.
|
Why can't his wins be passed to the second and third place competitors?
Oh yeah, they've almost all already been caught for the same.
And besides,.... seriously... WHAT THE FUCK????
No bigger things to worry about in the world? We have to give a fuck about a guy who rides a bicycle and generates hundreds of millions for charity? Creates jobs? Pays 10s of millions in taxes over his career.
We have to all group together as a society and tear him down because we've officially run out of problems?
"20 of 21 top-3 finishers from 1999 to 2005 were doing it, and 36 of 45 top-3 finishers from 1996 to 2010 were doing it. Take a look at this paragraph (which was slipped into the introduction of the report without much comment) in the USADA report: here
Twenty of the twenty-one podium finishers in the Tour de France from 1999 through 2005 have been directly tied to likely doping through admissions, sanctions, public investigations or exceeding the UCI hematocrit threshold. Of the forty-five podium finishes during the time period between 1996 and 2010, thirty-six were by riders similarly tainted by doping.
So in a 15-year period, there were only 9 riders who managed to succeed without cheating, according to the USADA.
It's fair to say that in that period, doping was a competitive element of the sport. You could argue that no one got an unfair advantage by doping because everyone was competing on the same (albeit outlawed) chemical playing field.
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/tour-de-france-doping-statistics-2012-10#ixzz2IAboWSfC"