Show #195 – A Long Time Coming
Aug 29th, 2012 | By Fredcaster | Category: Podcasts
THE FREDCAST CYCLING PODCAST
Episode 195
A Long Time Coming
August 28, 2012
Listen now by clicking here: [audio:http://traffic.libsyn.com/thefredcast/The_FredCast_195.mp3]
NEWS SPECIAL – Lance and Jonathan
In this episode of The FredCast Cycling Podcast, we provide an in-depth look at the timeline and events surrounding the USADA v. Lance Armstrong case and how we arrived at a situation where Lance Armstrong faces a lifetime ban and the loss of his 7 Tour de France victories. We will also explore the Jonathan Vaughters op-ed piece in the New York Times.
[iframe same_height_as=”content” src=”https://thefredcast.com/195_Show_Notes/index.html”]
HOW TO LISTEN TO THE FREDCAST
iTunes MP3 Subscription
iTunes Enhanced AAC Subscription (includes chapters, links and graphics)
Listen to or Download the MP3 File
Listen with Windows Media Player
Listen with RealAudio
Subscribe via Pod Catcher or RSS Reader
The FredCast Cycling Podcast is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
First, thanks for the explanation of the Lance case. I did not understand how USADA, WADA, and the UCI along with the US Cycling Association (correct?) interact. The wolf watching the henhouse analogy makes a great deal of sense.
Second, I’m not so certain that Vaughters needs to be vilified. You use the word yourself, “dialogue”. It is my opinion that the UCI needs to open the dialogue with current and past riders to discuss PEDs. Vaughters seems to be engaging in dialogue. You’ve discussed this previously on the Spokesmen, so I won’t try to belabor how this could be done, but I defer to your panel of experts. Specifically regarding Vaughters and black vs white/shades of gray, I agree with Jim Moss. Vaughters is not throwing his PED use out there saying “I was smart enough to get away with it, damn you all”. Instead, in my opinion, he’s saying it was done, is still being done, and needs to stop.
Third, your comments remind me of Kurt Warner. If you recall, he admitted that he didn’t want his son to play football due to issues with head injuries. He was subsequently criticized by fellow NFL vets for tainting the league that gave him and continues to give him a living. Now, I doubt your podcast generates an NFL QB or analyst income. However, your thousands of listeners tune in mainly or at least partly to hear about professional cycling. The USA Pro Challenge was exciting to many of us. We like it, whether it is tainted now or not. It’s the best we’ve got.
Finally, on a less serious note, on the next Spokesmen, ask Jim Moss who won the climb up Independence Pass: Jim or his brother?!
Thanks for your work!!!
Thanks for your passionate insights David.
I don’t think this will ever stop.
Reading Mark’s comments about QBs made me think of a co-worker who was drafted by the Eagles when Randall Cunningham was king. He was a collegiate record holder, but was not good enough to suit up. He went onto grad school, but his stories made me very sympathetic for the 3rd string offensive lineman – scared of the real world – holding onto his NFL paycheck as long as he can. You could even say this behavior is not limited to athletes (look at say…. bankers).
Add to this the mental aspect – not all physically gifted folks are pros – which requires an ego that refuses to lose (again – not limited to athletes). Are these the basic cheating components? They could explain why the world’s most successful banks consciously gamed the LIBOR calculation.
Look at me – a middle aged, desk jockey who has no prayer to ever win a race. But yet I invest my resources in nutrition, drinks, clothing, and equipment – all so I can ride my loop 5 minutes faster. I have an absolute blast doing it – it makes me happy. No one watches, so I can lie about my time, but that’s not the point. I’m working so hard to say I can do it.
Thus, it’ll never end.
Keep up the good work David!
Carl
David
After listening to your recent podcast, which I greatly appreciated, I was worried that you felt disillusioned about professional cycling.
I for one am not disillusioned with this case, but am actually hopeful and he is why.
I came to road cycling and racing in 2003 so I started off as a Lance fan (actually I was more of a Ullrich fan but that’s not really all that important). Over the years I have come to learn about the problems that cycling has had with doping, and yes I am disappointed with how it has turned out, but I think things are getting better. Why you might ask? Because of cases being undertaken by groups like USADA, by the work done by the equivalent groups in many nations and more importantly the admission of those during the dark period who have moved forward.
The saying goes that for evil to survive it only takes a good man to away, well there not any more. Vaughters, like others, are trying to be those good men and are not looking away. It’s causing desperation in those who wish evil, like McQuaid, and this is making it stand out.
Do I think all of this will stop everyone who will look to PED’s, no, we cannot destroy evil. What we can do is make its life very hard to take hold.
David,
Wow, this podcast is one of your better ones. Thanks for looking at both sides. Keep up the great work!
David, what electric bike do you have?
I have a Trek 6000 mountain bike built up with a BionX battery and motor. I like the BionX because it has a very natural feeling when I pedal.
Another podcast I listen to is Freakonomics. On July 30, 2012 they broadcast a program: “Freakonomics Goes to Collegeâ€Â. The main guest Allen Ezell, a former FBI agent states that over a million fake college diplomas are currently on the market. He states that approximately one percent of all diplomas awarded each year are phony. These include degrees in anesthesiology, cardiology, dermatology, endocrinology, gastroenterology, neurology, obstetrics, oncology, ophthalmology, pediatrics, psychiatry, radiology, surgery, and urology. When Allen Ezell retired from the agency in 1991, the FBI stopped investigating phony diplomas.
So it does appear that many Americans face the decision that Jonathan Vaughters had to make and Like JV many choose to cheat. In the end professional cycling is entertainment. So I am not going to get overly upset over the Lance Armstrong case. However, a lot of time, money and effort was spent to expose Lance. I do wonder why we do not go to the same amount of effort to uncover doctors and others in critical professions who cheat with phony diplomas.
“Approximately one percent of all diplomas awarded each year are phony.” And from this you deduce that “many Americans face the decision that Vaughters has to make?” 1%? Sounds to me like 99% of American make the right decision, unlike Vaughters. That isn’t “many” Americans, that is an incredibly tiny minority. And like Vaughters, and perhaps Lance, they too made the wrong choice.
Great podcast. Don’t know how you managed to keep going for one and a half hours on one subject but well done for summarising all the issues.
One thing that strikes me that hasn’t mentioned anywhere that I can find, is consistency, or lack of, amongst dopers. Let me explain.
Just about every pro cyclist, in particular grand tour riders, who have subsequently been found to dope have a very inconsistent results pattern, on year brilliant, next year nowhere. Think Riis, Ullrich, Pantani and also non winners like Züllo and Basso for example. Armstrong has been the opposite, very consistent performances year on year from 99 to 05. That makes him a real outlier among dopers or not a doper.
For a long time, I believed it was the latter but the evidence points at the former, for now.
Yes, I “deduced” that one million fake diplomas circulating in the USA is too many people cheating their way to the top.
@Jonathan T:
I’m not arguing that using a fake diploma is right, or that 1 million of them circulating the United States isn’t scary. Nor am I so naive to think that people won’t lie, cheat or steal their way to the top. We all know that they will. I just read your original comment as a justification for what JV did and/or as a condemnation of Americans.
My personal opinion is that most Americans, indeed most humans, try to do the right thing. It seems that my opinion is bolstered by your numbers (1% vs. 99%).
Even if 50% of the people were doing the wrong thing, I would still condemn them.
Great podcast!
I think the most sickening thing about doping is the incessant lying involved. You can see it in Lance’s face every time he’s interviewed, and it’s been like that for many years now. There’s a certain amount of “soul erosion”, for lack of a better term, that happens when someone lies that much and for such a long time. Lying becomes absolutely okay after a while; it becomes just another way to solve problems.
I’m not talking about lying in order to save someone’s feelings or help someone in need. I’m talking about turning into someone that others can’t trust. That, to me, is the saddest part of this whole scenario.
I was an amateur bodybuilder in my late teens and early 20s, but never did compete because everyone else was juiced out of their minds. I did it because it made me feel incredibly vital and healthy, and gave me tons of energy. It was a natural stress-relieving high. Isn’t that good enough?
Like you, I’ve become sick of professional cycling and don’t bother with it anymore. I stick to tons of cycling, skating and drumming.
You showed a lot of courage by releasing this podcast. You stood to lose a lot of listeners by speaking your mind, and you did it anyway! Good for you! More people should be as brave as you!
I’ve been listening to your show for years David; and in my opinion, this is probably the best show you have ever done.
Without shows like this one, I too would be disillusioned with the sport I enjoy so much. The fact that someone else feels the same way as I do on this issue, and expresses it public, restores some of the faith that is all too regularly taken away.
I absolutely agree that the best chance for the sport of cycling to become “clean†is for cyclists and cycling fans, such as us, to openly condemn this dangerous behaviour in the strongest way possible, whenever possible.
Thanks again.
Lee
First, thank for having the cojones to do this show. Second, it is your show, so you definitely have the “right” to speak your mind. I found it really interesting to get these kind of details in a wrap-up like this. The only thing I would like to add is that I don’t look to “sport stars” to be my role models. My morals and roadmap are acquired from my upbringing and life experiences. And I try to help my children along, in the same manner. I watch sports to get excited about amazing people doing incredible things, things which I dream of doing. Everyone knows that people cheat. You can only put your faith in the system and enjoy what you can get. It hurts that it has turned out this way with Lance, but I sure enjoyed the ride!
David,
great show and as others here have mentioned it does indeed take some conjones to express your opinion given your stature in the industry.
In defense of Lance and some of the others that you have mentioned, you never mentioned the financial and emotional toll it would take to go up against the USADA. This is agency with a multi-million dollar bankroll, with full-time council embedded in that agency, and with an office of support staff is just focused on prosecution. Lance, though a wealthy man, could very quickly become a very un-wealthy man defending this. Look at what happened to both Landis and Tyler, the defense drained them financially, and emotionally, to the point where Floyd was forced to sell all of his yellow jerseys, bikes and everything to defend himself and eventually his wife divorced him. Similarly with Tyler to where he suffered great emotional, and financial suffering as a result of the defense.
You are talking about an athlete at the end of his money making career where all athletes need to start to go into money saving mode not spending. He already had 3 attorneys for the preliminary defense and had he decided to peruse the formal defense he probably needed 3 more. The defense would have been well into the million of dollars. And for what, will his tours ever be stripped (not clear on this so please feel free to enlighten), maybe not because the USADA has little jurisdiction with the UCI (not sure on this as well). But at lances stage of his career being banned form competitive cycling and now triathlon has gotta hurt emotionally but at least he has the financial being to live out his life comfortably.
I appreciate your moral viewpoint, I just think there was a financial part of the decision process for Lance where he did not want to deplete his nest egg for something that was on principle and, had he won against the USADA ruling, had little to gain financially.
Hi David
I’ve been listening to your podcast since virtually day one. I think your résumé was interesting and well presented, but i also think you went a bit overboard with your personal response. When you state your case multiple times in different ways it does appear that you are patronising your listener and you end up with a more extreme and less convincing argument. You say it’s black and white (no shades of grey), you talk about choosing to do 65 in a 55 zone and missing stop signs. So, you NEVER do that (remember; black and white?) Traffic violations can result in a fine or jail or the death of a child whereas doping is not even against the law in most cases. These are the arbitory rules of a ‘game’ and although wrong they cannot be judged in the same way; life is not ‘black and white’.
You then say that you ‘despise’ people like JV and Vino, but they are not breaking any rules in running a team or riding and winning the Olympic gold. You may not like Vinos attitude but he served his ban and has the right to ride. If it is black and white then you have to let him ride, or are you just guided by your own moral compass. You have to decide.
The trouble is, I totally agree with you, I just wish you’d presented it better.