Its Not About the Drug Test - A Controversial Rant

As a preface, this is an extremely uncharacteristically Libertarian post from a person who avidly hates Libertarians... I'm more likely to take well to a passionate right winger, than a libertarian. There was one some quiz where you answered questions about your personal and economic viewpoints and it told you where you were on the political scale... my result: you are a Fascist.

So far as I am concerned, there are my opinions, and then there are wrong opinions. Period. This, however, has nothing to do with respect, and everything to do with stubborn-ness, but I digress.

The idea for this post was first conceived after yesterday's debacle that saw my TdF hero Vino disgraced... but in the end, there wasn't enough time in between work and crying at my desk to adequately express how I feel. Reading all of the discussions that resulted from the whole whether or not Bannister deserves respect, or rabbited races, or dating non-runners... I guess I recognized a common thread in every response I wanted to post... so I decided to compile it into a single rant, rather than to post like 5 separate rants on each thread. Here goes:

The respect of any given person is their right and theirs only to grant or not grant to whomever or whatever abstract concept they so please.

I think Katherine is right, that we have to be open to all different types of opinions and takes and meanings that running has to people, and recognize merit or validity... however, the final decision of whether you want to respect that, associate with that, or be around it resides with you. There doesn't need to be, there probably can't be a consensus as to what we as a whole "ought" to respect or value.

If a sorority girl in pink stretchy exercise pants is jogging along in order to lose weight to attract a frat boy, no one has the right to deny her existence or the fact that she is there running... in that sense, she is valid. A Fred on a bike is valid, a guy who decided to get up and run today for the first time in 10 years is valid. The act of running at any given moment is tantamount to validity, irrespective of motive or circumstance. All anyone external can do is overlay their opinion on the situation: "I respect this person for being out there with a purpose, even if its not the same one as mine" or you can say "At least they are out there" or you can say "I don't respect this person because their motives are vacuous"

That said... I feel like everyone's condemnation of whomever happened to be the latest failer of a doping test is myopic and irksome. Its not about who failed the drug test... its an issue thats much, much bigger than that. I really, really, wanted to believe that my heroes were clean, and they were good cuz they were special, but its looking more and more like Peter may be right--everyone in that front pack is doping. There comes a point where it may be naivete to think that certain people are exempt from the limitations of the human body... Just because you don't happen to get caught, doesn't make you any less guilty.

Case in point, Rasmussen managed to evade recent doping tests, but this untimely withdrawal is tantamount to a confession. A lot of others have tried to gracefully remove themselves, while some continue to protest innocence in the face of overwhelming evidence. The thing is though, if you listen to some of the more honest sounding confessions, its actually really kind of a sad state of affairs. I believe that cycling is a little bit different than track or baseball... in cycling the structure of sponsorship, team organization and the politics of it all make it inordinately hard for anyone to survive and remain clean... its less like I'm going to dope to win a gold medal or to set records... and more like I've got to dope or else I'll be out of a job. It's not that these people are all idiots, its that they are caught in this dilemma between the thing that is their passion, and being able to make a living. Cyclists race hundreds of days out of the year, they can't *have* a side job... Its not about "I'm gonna dope cuz I think I can get away with it" its like, they feel like they have no other choice, its that, or get cut from your team, be out of a job...

I feel like making a spectacle out of the latest person who got caught is NOT the answer. The only way that this will get better is to remove this situation where the only way to compete is to cheat. This means, getting rid of ALL of the bad seeds, not just the unlucky ones that got tested that day. What pisses me off is, how does no one know about any of these offenses until the Tour has already started... how do you GET to the point where people are saying "oh if we'd known this before..." Why was the whole Operation Puerto thing conveniently released RIGHT before the start? It's like the "authorities" only have sensationalism in mind, rather than a fair and systematic way to catch cheats. If you test only the stage winner and 2/160-170 finishers, OBVIOUSLY people will cheat, because there isn't exactly a high likelihood of being tested. If you can have multiple warnings and still somehow be allowed to start the Tour anyways, OBVIOUSLY people won't make more of an effort to follow rules. And then they have the gall to wonder why the sport hasn't been cleaned up? Look at how things are run here, bandaid does NOT cover the bullet hole... it is CLEARLY your own fault.

And what is up with all of the tests being processed in a black box at a singular French Lab that Lance claims tried to slander him? WTF? Why not make the process more public, and have all of the samples handled by a neutral third party, with testing to be conducted by an international panel, given that it is, like the Olympics, a very international event? Not to shout conspiracy theory, but I find this a bit dodgy.

I am sick and tired of repeating this process, where every time someone emerges as a cool new cycling hero, that's when suddenly they get nabbed. Its almost like they do it for the purposes of scandal. FIND A GODDAMN WAY TO GET THE CHEATS *BEFORE* THEY DO SOMETHING SPECTACULAR... if people are caught at a rate of a couple per Tour, after they have managed some sort of athletic feat and have won everyone's heart... this is seriously going to kill the sport.

Last year, I was really disappointed with Floyd Landis... this year, I'm just mad. Mad at those stupid UCI officials and stupid Christian Prudhomme... get off your holier than thou high horse and find a damn way that's fair and effective to deal with this. Find a way to get the policing act together. Its like how the Ministry of Magic did not want to admit Voldemort's return... they think a few polite testings here and there and some public tarrings and featherings will stop this? 200 some odd elite cyclists who feel like doping is the only way to keep up with the Jones' are obviously not going to be counted on to ALL turn themselves in and be the first to be clean... its the prisoner's dilemma, classic game theory. This isn't exactly the same as baseball or track where it at least appears that cheaters are the minority, and the really good ones still win without.

So, fuck this shit. I still like Vino... he embodies all of the qualities that I admire in an athlete. If everyone's a cheat, then he still comes out on top. If you want to denounce me for supporting a cheat, then fine. Go right ahead. People make mistakes... is it really reasonable that the cycling population just happens to have a disproportionately large amount of bad seeds? I feel like you *have* to look at the bigger picture of why this is happening... They're all in a really tough spot, and to be honest, I actually DO understand why a person who has a talent for something like this wouldn't be able to walk away from the dilemma and just say, oh, well... since its this way, I'll just decide to give it up and be a waiter or something. Vino, Landis, Rasmussen... its like, they're all people who made a mistake that I easily could also have made in that position. So, no... I can't stand here and be part of the "wow, how horrifying, how stupid they must be" contingent.

Vino, and all the rest, whatever your story is... I support you. I support you because, in the end, I think that the change will have to come from more open-ness, honesty, more communication, collaboration, and trust between teams, sponsors, testers, fans and cyclists. Fear and condemnation is not the answer.


Addendum - Quick notes on other current discussion topics:

Mark's hilarious analogy with Mozart and Salieri almost made me snort my tea this morning... nevertheless, the flaw in the analogy is that the link between effort and performance is substantially lower in art and music than in running. Kangway, I wholly understand what you mean about people who just put up pretty numbers by having natural talent... and it IS particularly irritating to see people waste talent, but I have to say though that Bannister probably gave a shit about the 4 minute mile, and that caring and perseverance towards a running goal, despite other contraints in his life make him admirable to me. The fact that he did all of these treadmill experiments on his friends in his lab too is pretty cool, and indicates to me that running meant something to him, even if ultimately he dedicated a suboptimal amount of his time and his life to it.

When I read the book about Bannister, Landy and Wes Santee, my first reaction was... good grief, in terms of training, they were ALL a bunch of idiots. How they managed to break 4 minutes in the mile despite this horrific understanding of training philosophy left me with a bizarre blend of wonder. Its like, for me, there is a complex system of merits and de-merits that governs how much, personally I admire a runner... and its not just about the magnitude of effort. Does a guy who stupidly runs 100 mile weeks with no plan and no understanding of training deserve more credit than a guy who runs 80 mile weeks, really thinking about what the purpose of each run is and where he is with his training and ability level? I feel like Bannister and Landy both get the same de-merit for poor training technique as far as I am concerned.

On to the next subject, records set with a pacer DEFINITELY get a de-merit, I think. To quote the Brain, running is about racing and not time trialing. A paced race is tantamount to having a field of competition that is trying to help you instead of beat you! What kind of B.S. is that, both physically and psychologically? Don't get me wrong, world records ARE fascinating, however, come time to evaluate something squashy like a "who is the best runner of all time", etc. then definitely I am not likely to value a record set with a pacer over a slightly slower time won in fair competition.

I didn't realize how much difference a rabbit makes until I read that Paula Radcliff's marathon record is like 3 minutes faster than every women's marathon ever contested by anyone WITHOUT a male pacer. In the case of elite women marathoners, it IS possible to have a rabbit who legitimately finishes the race the whole way. It was then that it dawned on me how much easier it is must be to just tuck in behind some guy to pace you for 26.2 miles, rather than swinging it on your own, wondering for over 2 hours if you're running the right pace and if you fuck up, if second place will beat you at the line....

As for the dating runners thread, in the same way that Kangway chooses to disrespect Bannister for not putting enough focus of his life into training, I choose to issue de-merits to those who are distracted by non-running significant others. It doesn't mean that I disrespect your choices, simply that you are making a mistake that I find incomprehensible. Given the amount of your physical time and your emotional energy that is required of being a serious athlete, I feel that you ought not to have enough time left over for a significant other who does not fully understand or belong in your world, and that if you DO have enough time, then inherently you aren't putting an optimal amount of emotional energy into running. Ofcourse I know people will say its not MY judgment to make as to what someone needs to expend of their life to be called a serious athlete, but hey, opinions are opinions. I'm entitled to mine.