19 June 2009

Doubt

I should just stop reading so much. The more you read, the more cynical you become. Like quicksand. The harder you struggle to understand, the less hope you have of ever understanding. Dueling doping experts who can't even seem to agree on fundamental scientific issues. An endless parade of shifty-eyed riders whose denials range from teasingly plausible to absurdly fantastical. Illusory hopes of semi-certainty repeatedly crushed under new cascades of doubt. Rumors piled upon speculation built on a rotting foundation of betrayed trust. Half-formed, flimsy explanations glued together with arrogance and officious self-congratulation. Just trust us? Please. And that goes equally for both sides.

Cycling as a sport may not hold a monopoly on smooth-talking, suspicious enigmas whose prodigious charisma somehow is permitted to obscure their mercenary ways (see tennis), yet we do seem to reign sadly supreme when it comes to the sheer volume of confounding controversy and ambiguity over issues of doping and anti-doping. I need a magic decoder ring, because I possess no ability to make sense of the morass of contradictory rhetoric. Kohl might be right, or he might just be a self-serving liar who is making up a bunch of good stories to make himself feel better. Gripper might be telling the truth, or she might just prefer to be employed rather than unemployed. McQuaid might be right to praise the bio-passport, or he might just be trying to make himself appear so very virtuous in the eyes of the imperial IOC, whose recurring distaste for cycling's filth is well-known. I might be right to think catching 5 minnows in a sea of sharks is hardly worth crowing over, or I might just be another miserable whiner polluting the interwebs with my useless opinion.

Meanwhile a number of notably dark clouds loom on the horizon, perhaps awaiting the media frenzy of the Tour to begin pouring more rain upon any hopes for a semi-syringe-free past or future. Samples from the 2008 Giro are being retro-actively tested after they were seized by Italian police. That could be scary or great or just plain pathetic (I vote pathetic, especially for whatever shreds remain of the CSF Navigare desperadoes). CONI supposedly has other riders in the crosshairs beyond just poor persecuted Valv.Piti (CAS, here we come, again). Next in line may be Amigo de Birillo or Luigi. (Cue image of Bjarne Riis wearing his familiar tormented martyr expression and guzzling hard liquor.) Too bad that Amigo de Birillo is rather closely related to Riis's mother lode, the golden boy also known as Hermano de Amigo de Birillo. Wonder if Golden Boy ever was tempted to donate funds to an unknown, unnamed person for undelivered training plans? IQ, or lack there-of, does tend to run in families, does it not? Oh wait, is Golden Boy a favorite for the Tour? He is? I should quit asking such inconvenient questions. Damn miserable whiner. Then there is Luigi, whose actual identity is a sort of non-mystery mystery. Two illustrious riders are said to vie for the prize of bearing this coveted nickname, with the winner being granted two years to cry in their red wine (Italian or Swiss) and proclaim their innocence against unjust persecution. (Piti has taught them all well.)

In other happy news, results of your standard, run-of-the-mill dope tests from the Giro could arrive at any time, or not, who knows. Judging by the approximate quality of the final podium's doping skills, the doping doctors may just have won this round. Unofficial score: Santuccione/Humanplasma 1 - fans 0. CONI seemed strangely absent from the Giro this year, with a notable lack of any unexpected evening tests, which in the past found several adult riders to actually be toddlers in disguise, at least according to their steroid levels. No wonder they throw so many tantrums when someone eats the last of their muesli. Perhaps Ettore Torri has simply tired of being subjected to the eye-bleeding fashion disasters that Italian riders insist on wearing to doping hearings for some unfathomably Italian reason. "I may be a cheat and a fraud, but the important thing is that I dress well." Priorities are priorities. Because we all know that a stunningly expensive watch and the right sunglasses outweigh any misdeed.

In other news, latest issue of Procycling has an excerpt from Cocky Cav's rather premature life story Boy Racer, in which he relates a horror story about an incompetent ACE tester mangling his arm with a large needle while searching for a vein during the Tour last year. Boy Wonder was so angry and traumatized over the tester's painful flubbing that he refused to be tested by ACE ever again. That's right. No more tests for the remainder of the season. The vaunted ACE, subject of so many column inches of PR hype for the "clean teams", now seems to have left some rather conspicuously gaping holes in their testing procedures and protocols. If riders can just opt out, what is the point anyway? More doubt. Seems ACE's demise was hardly mourned by the Columbia crew, and why should they? If ACE couldn't even find qualified staff to handle their testing, then what does that say about the professionalism of their entire organization? Doubt.

I almost forgot to mention that World War III, the pro-cycling version of mutually assured destruction, is now set to explode sometime in 2010, as Trek (aka LA's puppets) takes on LeMond in a potentially no-holds-barred trial, which could in theory drag a huge amount of very dirty laundry out into the glare of the media spotlight. You think the SCA case brought about some serious revelations, just wait. Some people think this case will be settled long before trial to avoid damaging testimony that could hinder the Second Coming's political aspirations (gag), while others think that Trek and LeMond will fight to the bloody death, side-effects and lawyers' fees be damned. Regardless of who wins any eventual trial, the potential stakes for LA are huge.

Stay tuned for more semi-coherent rambling from the addled post-Twitter-withdrawal version of CFA, who has given up reading Cycling News and just reads Bike Radar instead, since they are the same damn thing anyway.

18 comments:

SinglespeedJarvis said...

Welcome back. I still think you need to believe on some level, if you're hammering Columbia then really you should be hammering Garmin as well. How does VDV stack up in all this give his past teams and the fact that he finished 5th last year?

Anonymous said...

Great to have you back,another good read.Never fails to amaze the way cycling damages itself.

simonlamb said...

its good to see you back.

Simon
http://lagazzettadellobici.blogspot.com/

smarty said...

Welcome back. This is vastly preferable to twitter.

Anonymous said...

Good post, welcome back..!

Anonymous said...

Ditto

Anonymous said...

Good read, pleased to see your blog return. I agree with your sentiments. Don't let the dopers get you down. This is our sport and there are a growing number of clean riders. The races deliver their own verdict on winners and dopers.

Anonymous said...

Since it is obviously so easy to identify the doping cyclists then how about pointing out what cyclists are not suspicious? Surely, it cannot be all of them doping! So are Columbia and Garmin really holier-than-thou puritans of the peloton? Everyone in cycling must have been teammates with known dopers at some time; therefore all cyclists must be dopers due to the guilt-by-association clause. So, then, who is riding without illegal aid? Surely with your knowledge you can name some riders who are innocent...or at least not very shady in the sea of sick cheaters. Unless such is impossible because being the fan of anything requires faith/trust. Perhaps the best disillusioned fans (of any/all sports) can do is cheer those who appear most transparent; but said "transparency" could cloak deception. Appearance is everything then.

Anonymous said...

Welcome back. Was good to see a new article pop up in Google Reader today!

Anonymous said...

I'm thrilled to have you back!
Keep it up! We need you!
I couldn't follow the twitter.

racejunkie said...

I sympathize, CFA. I've started to think that perhaps the best we all can do to keep the same passion that drew us to this beautiful sport, despite the obscene scandals that lately consume it, is to focus on things that doping can't touch, like pure technique. After all, a Schumacher who rips it up at some time trials only with serious help still hasn't the perfect aerodynamic form of say a Dave Zabriskie, and no amount of drug-fueled speed can make some lumpen idiot a better bike handler. Keeps me from keeling over whenever I hear the name "Heras"!

Regards,

Racejunkie

ant1 said...

nice to have you back.

GKK said...

Glad to see you back, but please keep up the Tweets.

Anonymous said...

Great to see you back!

Been following on twitter, but kept the webpage in the bookmarks keenly hoping that "days or weeks" might one day actually pass.

Yay cycling, no matter how silly it is!

Cheers from Canada!

Anonymous said...

wb CFA
good stuff. missed your blog. they`re not ramblings-lot of truth in what you write,,,,,

Anonymous said...

Welcome back from another Canuck! Yes, good to see you back posting and a big +1 to all those who suggested you forget about Twitter.

Don't let that search for cycling purity get you down - it simply doesn't exist. I'm enjoying the spectacle of the carnival for now and ignoring the results... more fun that way. Good luck.

pommi said...

Finally you're back ... what took you so long ;-) ... seriously, welcome back !

Frenchy aka Bike Boy said...

Thank you for coming back- your long pieces (I did not like twitter...) are great. So very much appreciated.
Thank you.