Cyclingnews TV   News  Tech   Features   Road   MTB   BMX   Cyclo-cross   Track    Photos    Fitness    Letters   Search   Forum  

Recently on

Mt Hood Classic
Photo ©: Swift

Letters to Cyclingnews - October 5, 2007

Here's your chance to get more involved with Cyclingnews. Comments and criticism on current stories, races, coverage and anything cycling related are welcomed, even pictures if you wish. Letters should be brief (less than 300 words), with the sender clearly identified. They may be edited for space and clarity; please stick to one topic per letter. We will normally include your name and place of residence, but not your email address unless you specify in the message.

Please email your correspondence to

Cycle drama
It's not doping that's "killing" the sport
Why is VAM a benchmark
Tour of America
The Landis decision
Rock & Republic's CEO Michael Ball
Please explain
Giuseppe Guerini

Cycle drama

Seriously, is it just me or is the public squabbling between sporting officials over cycling reaching the point of sheer madness? I have never seen this type of petty in-fighting. Here in Canada our national sport of hockey went through a similar crisis with both sides of a stalemated polemic bickering and bad-mouthing each other in the press, but it was never as bad as in cycling this past year.

Leadership is making some big errors. Too much of this negative publicity will kill cycling as a viable advertising medium. We can all agree that it is already becoming quite ill.

What would it take to start a professional cycling league, like hockey, football, basketball or baseball in America that possesses a proper 'players' union? Teams would negotiate with riders based on the guidelines of a collective agreement. Race organizers would have to provide minimum standards in accordance with the agreement. Races could invite whatever teams they would like (with a rule making the top ten ranked teams mandatory). Bargaining would involve all three parties (each with effectively 33% power over the sport) to promote clean sport, adequate sponsor opportunities and fair working conditions.

A real union could help riders with addiction problems and getting their lives sorted out. It could also defend the rights of riders to fair trials and privacy using the sharp teeth of the law. Until facts prove them guilty, what has been done to the reputations of Valverde and Bettini is criminal. It is not simply the riders that should be held accountable!

The current functions of the UCI would roll into a new body like FIFA or the International Ice Hockey Federation that would establish points, rankings, equipment rules etc. This body would be much lower profile and would serve to promote consistency in the sport of cycling across international federations and levels of participation amateur or professional.

Perry Longinotti
Thursday, September 27, 2007

Respond to this letter

It's not doping that's "killing" the sport…

I have to say that, for me, it isn't the issue of doping that is killing the sport. It's the constant bickering between the UCI, ASO, and all the different national federations. The new court injunction that is an attempt to prevent Bettini and di Luca from racing is a joke and totally unnecessary. It's a slap in the face for the riders and the UCI.

I'm tired of hearing about single people like Susanne Eisenmann who basically try to deal with the problem all on their own. They do nothing but make a mess of things and make it unpleasant for those of us watching and rooting on the riders. I don't like doping as much as the next person, but this business of playing favourites, leaving certain riders out, waging one-man campaigns on certain riders/teams and bickering makes me care less about what's going on.

Maybe it's just my American way of thinking, but if a certain rider hasn't been proven guilty of doping, then as far as I'm concerned they haven't doped. In other words, let them race!

Jeff Cummings
Okinawa, Japan
Thursday, September 27, 2007

Respond to this letter

Why is VAM a benchmark

In response to Eric Turner: If you eliminate wind resistance and rolling friction (and frictional drive train losses) you would be putting out zero power to maintain constant speed. In fact, if you eliminate those items, you would not need to pedal in order to maintain your speed. Power is the rate of doing work, or the rate of change of energy. If you do not increase your speed, you have not changed your kinetic energy. If you do not change your elevation, you have done no work overcoming gravity. And you've already eliminated friction, so no work is done overcoming that either.

On flat ground, overcoming wind resistance comprises the largest amount of energy output, as wind resistance is dependent upon the square of velocity. Riding a bike at 20kph gives four times the resistance of riding at 10kph. This is why pack riding and sprinter lead outs are so important on the flat stages. Riders in the middle have relatively little wind resistance to overcome. However, when climbing, the speeds are greatly reduced; therefore the wind resistance is far less. In this case, it is the change in elevation that you are overcoming which necessitates the largest energy output.

VAM is a benchmark because when climbing, energy overcoming wind resistance is assumed to be a small percentage of the total energy output while changing elevation makes up the vast majority. Of course, the steeper the hill, the slower the speed and the more accurate this number becomes. Because of this, you will always get higher VAM numbers for steeper hills.

Brian Robinson
Austin, TX, USA
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

Why is VAM a benchmark #2

I'd like to respond to Erik Turner's reply to my discussion of VAM. First, he says

"When you equated Power to mass*g*VAM, you are not using the correct distance for this formula. To be correct, that length per time is your speed, not your vertical gain. This would only be true if you were travelling straight up! Think about it this way, if your equation is correct, you can only have a non-zero power when climbing! Obviously not true, even if you neglect wind and road resistance."

Well, sorry Erik but this IS the correct expression within the approximation stated. With no friction, non-zero power implies that you are accelerating non-stop. That's Newton's second law: Force=mass*acceleration. For frictionless/air-resistance-free travel on a flat road, no force means constant velocity (think hockey puck). On the other hand, a force is required to climb and you can derive my expression by saying U=mgh where h is the altitude of the cyclist and U is the potential energy. Power is Energy/time, so P=U/t=m*g*(h/t). VAM is defined as h/t. So, my original statement is obviously... true.

As supporting evidence, the cyclist in Ferrari's test is asymptotically approaching the numerical value predicted by this simple formula at steeper slopes. To restate, higher slopes leads to slower speeds, meaning he's closer to the no-friction/no-wind resistance regime.

Second, I did NOT say that VAM should be used as a doping detector. What I said was "measuring VAM on such very steep inclines might indeed give a good measure of power", and this is still true. I hope doping detection improves from its current shoddy state (c.f. the Landis decision), and I actually agree that using VAM for this purpose would be a big step backwards. My motivation was more along the lines of - can I measure my power output accurately using VAM since I can't justify the expense of a power meter, or can I estimate another rider's power with a stopwatch. The answer is (within the bounds stated): YES. In fact, my Polar HRM with altitude does a good job of providing VAM, and I have noticed that, for me (prototypical slow cyclist), VAM is rather constant for any hill with at least moderate slope.

David Abraham
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

Tour of America

I agree with Michael who had some well thought out suggestions for organizers, sponsors, the participating teams, and local citizens. It would be a good start to promote cycling as a great spectator event as well as promoting the physical benefits of this healthy lifestyle.

With obesity rates soaring out of control in North America, cycling could be a tool that could link all vested interests: bike retailers, tourism, the medical community, local cities and state governments. We can get back to enjoying life by taking a bike rider through neighbouring regions instead of jumping in to the car. Of course, urban planners would have to start pushing for safe and bike friendly routes and perhaps our dependence on the car will start to diminish. I loved the idea of getting Amtrak on board. Clearly, Michael has taken advantage of touring Europe by train just as Europeans do daily. Of course we will never end up as bike friendly as Holland and other northern European countries, but what a way to start!

Liz Palmucci
Toronto, Canada
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

Tour of America #2

Someone needs to put this guy on the advisory board of the Tour and make it happen. Going from coast-to-coast is insane, but regionalizing it into four quadrants every four years is genius and would still make it much bigger than the other Grand Tours. Given a few years and with the right organizers and sponsors, maybe the Tour de France wouldn't be such hot stuff anymore.

Scott Nelson
New Orleans, USA
Saturday, September 29, 2007

Respond to this letter

Tour of America #3

Just to compound the madness currently on show between the Grand Tour organisers and the UCI, we now have a bunch of mad corporate Americans planning to use their money to try and further undermine the greatest sport on earth. Lets be quite clear here: the Grand Tours, and in particular the Tour de France are not just bike races with prize purses, they are huge cultural and social manifestations of a sport which makes incredible sense within the context of the confines of its European home.

It is not just the riders and teams who need to think about this kind of suicidal proposal that would stretch cycling to breaking point and diminish participation in the 3 grand Tours, it is the millions of fans who make the yearly pilgrimage to the Alps and Pyrenees from all corners of the earth and the further millions who can now access a month of cycling bliss on television as a result of the Tours success who need to tell American corporate investors to put their money behind the sport as it is and not try to own it in America. The sheer parochialism & lack of vision for the sport encompassed in this mad mans proposal was sickening.

James Broadway
Melbourne, Australia
Sunday, September 30, 2007

Respond to this letter

Tour of America #4

I appreciate I'm a little late but loved your story on the Tour of America ... an exceptionally well written piece. I admire your reporter's kind summation of the proposal. I mean, they are kidding aren't they? There has to be a scam hiding in there somewhere. I looked at the website and thought it so poorly written and presented that it sparked my curiosity to research both the good Doctor and Aqu Inc. which lead me to nothing, zip, zilch. The whole proposal is so fanciful that it could never happen and will, I suspect, only serve to create an extremely unfortunate and poorly timed corporate suspicion toward cycling should these bozos persist.

It makes you feel for guys like Vaughters who will have to fend off the inevitable questions and doubts while pushing wholly sincere objectives. If you took the total of everything that Tyler, Floyd, Vino and even Virenque have ever ingested it's still only a tiny fraction of what these guys are on.

Mick Meaney
Canberra, Australia
Wednesday, October 3, 2007

Respond to this letter

Tour of America #5

Has anybody seen the proposed Tour of America unofficial route? Are these people insane? Several stages in excess of 300-400km including a 370k mountainous romp from Chattanooga, TN to Asheville, NC, yikes! Let alone the fact that such a race is in September and October, so the World's and Vuelta (and other big races) would be out for anyone crazy enough to tackle this one. Also, would you do the TdF or the Giro and this race in a single year?

Let me see, a huge purse, an incomprehensible amount of riding per day with only 3 rest days, a very fertile environment for doping if I ever heard one. Didn't they shorten GT stages to try to lower the perceived need to dope?

Gary von Maucher
Acworth, GA, USA
Thursday, September 27, 2007

Respond to this letter

The Landis decision

So how does synthetic testosterone get into your system anyway? Right now cycling is far more at risk than "innocent" cyclists. Cycling is dying, sponsors are leaving; I as a fan am tiring of the games.

There is a small surge of teams and riders attempting to be clean (maybe), and a few are speaking out, but there is still a cloud over the sport and I fear the omerta still reigns. How is it possible that the word omerta is even associated with cycling?

Any given cyclist might not be doping, but it is obvious that organized doping is endemic within cycling. The names of the clean winners are hidden; there is not even pretence of figuring out who might have been clean; the needle is too far in the haystack. Here is a challenge:

Does anyone have any concept of who would be on a clean grand tour podium? I would like to hear your guesses.

How can we expect the truly innocent clean riders to fight through when the doping dopes and the dopers who dope them are consistently rewarded?

Floyd got caught playing with Vitamin T, on many counts he has been proven dishonourable. The dopers dishonour themselves, cycling, while the clean riders suffer in the pack. Or are all the clean riders suffering on their local hill?

Thom McNabb
Rancho Cucamonga, CA, USA
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

The Landis decision #2

In response to David Butterworth & others

I whole heartedly agree - the initial test has been called in to question and therefore (in my view) Floyd should be acquitted.

Did he dope? I don't know - all I know is that further tests on other urine (B) samples (which I believe should not legally have been performed) showed something amiss. But can they be used as evidence? I believe not - the A samples of these had not failed any doping test; therefore they (the B samples) cannot be tested.

Then there is the statement from the arbitration panel "The panel does, however note that the forensic corrections of the lab reflect sloppy practice on its part ... if such practices continue it may well be that in the future an error like this could result in the dismissal of an AAF (Adverse Analytical Finding) finding by the lab."

So what does that say - in my view, they were unhappy with the procedures so much so that they can foresee problems in the future if it continues. So what's less wrong with the testing of Floyds samples compared with what they can see in the future??

I don't doubt that cyclists dope, even big names. But at the moment it feels like there is a witch hunt, guilty until proven innocent - find a big scalp and take it by whatever means. If this was ever taken to civil courts it would be thrown out.

Until WADA, etc. put their house in order I think the fans will be unhappy (not withstanding that we know cycling has in the past been a very dirty sport) with the testing process.

I think that they should double the testing - take the A sample and split it two, then independently and simultaneously test the samples in different labs, then and only then if it is a positive test, the B sample should be tested, again in two different labs - perhaps even different from the two previous ones. While there are doubts about the tests this would go a long way to satisfy the doubters.

Justin Reynolds
Berkshire, UK
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

The Landis decision #3

I feel sorry for Landis too, but the guy had synthetic hormone in his system, and I don't care how much he took, or what exactly he took, the fact is that he took something. It also explains his extra terrestrial ride.

Apparently, pro riders do not consider synthetic products e.g. growth hormones, EPO or steroids as illegal, but more like a necessity to compete. Take Der Jan for example. Despite the mount of evidence against him, he still says he never used anything. The same goes for Basso, Herras and Hamilton. Just look at how many riders have been caught the past years and how many riders have admitted to using doping.

Yet, there are still people out there believing that you can win the Tour or a big one day classic without doping. Don't get me wrong, I am a fanatic cycling fan and will continue to be one. The fact of the matter is that top sport, whether it is cycling, soccer, football, baseball, tennis, athletics, is equivalent to synthetic hormones. Sorry, it just is.

Nashville, TN, USA
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

Landis decision #4

As a professional scientist who has been working in a strict Quality Assurance (QA) environment for the past 27 years, I am continually discouraged by the general public's overall lack of understanding of science and the scientific process. Lest anyone be confused, the Landis decision was not about proving that Floyd had taken exogenous testosterone. What the majority of the panel was concerned with was whether or not the lab had followed the procedures they had established to detect exogenous testosterone. They apparently considered the scientific validity of those procedures to be outside the scope of their investigation, and it was certainly outside their area of expertise.

The unrefuted testimony of Dr. Amory, the only real scientific expert on testosterone to testify, was that those procedures were not adequate to establish the presence of exogenous testosterone. You will note that the majority opinion does not refer to Dr. Amory's testimony - there is no way to reconcile it with the verdict they wanted to reach. So Floyd was found guilty on the basis of one WADA-accredited lab's flawed procedures, procedures that wouldn't even be accepted by other WADA-accredited labs. (For those who have been asleep through this farce, the French lab accepts the presence of elevated levels of a single exogenous testosterone metabolite as evidence of doping, while the US lab at UCLA requires the presence of three.) As Dr. Amory pointed out, exogenous testosterone metabolizes in a defined way, with the levels of metabolites rising and falling through time in a certain pattern. The analyses performed by the French lab of the entire set of Floyd's samples did not show the pattern that would be present if Floyd had, in fact, doped. Dr. Amory's opinion was that they made no sense at all.

Floyd was found guilty through a political process with no basis in science. WADA and the UCI are on a witch hunt, and Floyd was unfortunate enough to fall into their cross-hairs. I'm all for catching dopers and throwing them out of the peloton, but the tests must be scientifically valid and be performed by neutral, qualified analysts, not by a lab eager to break (or is that "make"?) the news for l'Equipe. Some form of equal protection under the law would be nice too, such as all WADA-accredited labs having the same criteria for what constitutes an adverse analytical finding. And since Floyd apparently passed all the same tests Oscar Pereiro and Andreas Klöden were subjected to, how about subjecting them to the same test Floyd supposedly failed before moving them up on the podium? Or doesn't fairness go that far?

All cyclists being coerced into signing that document promising to give up a year's salary if found guilty of doping should be afraid--the deck is stacked completely against them. Bravo to Bettini for refusing to sign.

Rick Beauheim
Carlsbad, NM, USA
Saturday, September 29, 2007

Respond to this letter


I think the pendulum has moved too far in the direction of trying to prevent any doping regardless how serious it actually affects fair competition. Although, I am not an expert at the techniques that are currently used to detect several types of doping, I have done experiments using similar techniques and I think they are difficult procedures and could result in convicting innocent riders.

I'm not against testing, but I think there should be a standard set of procedures that a simple and considered reliable by a large number of experts in the field. Just following the blood profile of cyclists and not attempting to determine whether this or that form of erythropoietin's are in the urine would be sufficient to exclude most athletes who are doing some form of blood doping.

There are also things that an athlete could do to increase erythropoietin or his/her hemocrit that are currently considered "natural" (hypobaric chambers, living in Tibet), that not all athletes may be able to do because of the expense. Should these ways be considered fundamentally different than directly consuming the hormone? One could argue that the competition is just as unfair between athletes living a sea level and those who live at high altitude most of the time. Certainly forbidding races at high altitude in Ecuador might be seen as unfair by some riders but has been proposed by cycling organizations.

Steroid use during a race of the type that Landis is accused of doing probably doesn't help the athlete's recovery rate. At least I have never read a convincing scientific paper that it does. If someone can refer me to such literature, I would be interested in reading it.

Most of the effects of steroid hormones take place over longer time periods than a single night. I am also not very convinced that the use of steroid hormones to increase muscle mass would help cyclists in grand Tours. If it did, it would probably only be for sprinters. So I'm not sure the effort to prevent any use of steroid hormones is worth the effort and expense, especially since there is probably a finite probability of excluding innocent riders who unknowingly ate or drank something with steroid hormones. Certainly with the large list of forbidden compounds that now exists, innocent mistakes could and have been made. At times it seems almost anything an athlete consumes which he/she thinks might help, is now being forbidden regardless of any science indicating it really does. So I think there needs to be a more measured consideration of how much control is really necessary to produce a relatively fair competition.

David Waddell
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter


This situation is ridiculous!

There seems to be a conspiracy by the UCI against certain national teams. Just see the news the past week:

The UCI didn't want Valverde at Worlds - even though he has raced since he's been cleared from Operation Puerto and the same goes for the case against Alan Davis.

The UCI then decided that they didn't want Di Luca there either pending investigation into the "oil for drugs" scandal, since last year right? But didn't he race since?? WHOOPS!!!

The Bettini affair was the most ridiculous of them all and I won't even pronounce on that matter.

This whole situation is ridiculous they should be fighting doping, not the sport or the riders.

David Rosa
Saturday, September 29, 2007

Respond to this letter

Rock & Republic's CEO Michael Ball

I read your story of Rock & Republic's CEO Michael Ball, and he doesn't sound like the nicest guy in the world. Of course, he is free to operate his business anyway he wishes, but his black & white views on bike racing is unrealistic, and is what perpetuates even the best athletes to resort to doping and cheating.

As Ball was quoted in your article; Ball's management style is quite evident just by speaking to him. "I told these guys you have to win," he said. "I said to Rahsaan half way through the season, 'I'm not paying you for second or third place. You either win or you're fired.' Same for the rest of them."

Each rider on the team must win or be fired? That is absolutely absurd.

Mr. Ball, your business isn't anywhere near the Ferrari legacy, and never will be if you pursue your overly simplistic views about people and bike racing. I for one, will not go out and buy any merchandise at your shops.

Saturday, September 29, 2007

Respond to this letter

Please explain

Dennis, it's simple. Everyone has an opinion, and loves an opportunity to present those opinions. That is why folks like you write letters to cyclingnews, and folks like me reply to them.

Mike Gates
Colorado Springs, CO, USA
Friday, September 28, 2007

Respond to this letter

Giuseppe Guerini

I have to second these sentiments regarding Turbo Beppe - he will be missed.

While living in Italy I meet Guerini at a small restaurant outside of Bergamo, in Gazzaniga. I was introduced by the restaurant's owner, and was simply told Giuseppe also likes to ride bikes. It took just a moment to realize that he was more than just a cycling enthusiast. But until the owner walk me over to a framed news paper clipping of Guerini raising his arms in victory at the top of L'Alpe d'Huez, I had no idea he was one of the world's greatest racers (top three in the Giro, and two stage wins in the Tour).

For the remainder of my year in Italy I saw him five or six more times at the restaurant. He always took the time to say hello and chat about racing. He was very curious to hear about America's perspective on pro cycling. We even exchanged emails during the 2005 Tour when he took a stage win. Under all that pressure, amidst the exhaustion of such a race, he took the time to thank me (and I'm sure many other fans) for congratulating him. Once he even invited me to ride with him! Unbelievable.

Pro cycling is better off because of people like Turbo Beppe.

Jonathan Fairman
Chicago, USA
Monday, October 1, 2007

Respond to this letter


Is it now time that the sport of cycling be governed by two federations as it had been in the past. Previously, professional cycling had been governed by the FICP (Federation Internationale des Cyclistes Professionels), whilst amateur cycling had been governed by the UCI. The differences and levels between the two branches of the sport have now become so great that they are, in essence, two completely different and distinct sports. The requirements of amateur and professional competitors are so different as to require separate organisations governing their sports.

This is probably the best time to re-introduce the two tier governance structures of the sport given the schism between the major professional race organisers and the UCI. ASO et al should seriously consider disaffiliating from the UCI and setting up a new FICP to oversee their races, whilst the UCI could revert to its former status as the governing body for amateur cycling.

Whilst this would mean that professionals would be excluded from competing in the Olympics, this would merely be a return to the situation pre-1996.

Monday, October 1, 2007

Respond to this letter

Recent letters pages

Letters 2007

  • September 28: Tour of America, World champion zany-ness, The Landis decision, ASO v UCI, McQuaid vs ASO vs the riders, Please explain, Why is VAM a benchmark, Giuseppe Guerini, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, ProTour and Le Tour, Where is the due process
  • September 21: Astana's future and Bruyneel, Bruyneel's afterlife, Floyd Landis decision, Why is VAM a benchmark, Lifetime bans, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, Ungrateful Levi, Spanish cycling, Where is the due process
  • September 14: Astana & Bruyneel, Cycling vs. soccer, Cycling will survive, Floyd Landis decision, LeMond's comments, Menchov felt betrayed by Rasmussen, Ungrateful Levi, Why is VAM a benchmark?
  • September 7: Cycling vs. soccer, Floyd Landis decision, UCI, ASO, LeMond, et al who cares? Riders, Lawyers in the Landis case, LeMond's comments, Riders taking the fall?, US Postal/Discovery R.I.P.
  • August 31: LeMond’s comments, Farewell De Peet, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Vino & human rights?, Cadel was robbed, Floyd Landis decision, Market beliefs, Sinkewitz Positive.
  • August 23: Biting the hand that feeds you, Cadel was robbed, Congratulations to grand tour organizers, Cycling needs a Norma Rae, Discovery folding, Drugs and cycling, Fewer ProTour teams, Floyd Landis decision, Petacchi’s asthma, Science of doping, Sinkewitz positive, Tailwind withdrawal, The good news...., Unibet, what a shame, World’s exclusion, Vino: "a clear violation of human rights"?,
  • August 17: Dying from within..., Cadel was robbed, Biting the hand that feeds you, Discovery folding, Astana-Tour cover-up?, Christian Moreni, UCI may lose it all, Drugs & cycling, Aussie proTour team, Valverde and the worlds, Klöden: are things getting out of control?, Congratulations to grand tours organizers
  • August 10: Smarter Drug Testing, Cassani and Rasmussen, Bruyneel: take doping seriously, The dubious Disco boys, Spanish ethics, Who's to blame for doping?, Untrustworthy authorities, Insurance for pro riders, Science of doping, It's working?, State of cycling, Less mountain stages, Positively false, Sinkewitz positive, Team suspensions, Tour ethics, Vino response, Editorials call for ending Tour, Revoking le Tours jerseys, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, WADA vigilantes
  • August 3, Part 1: What about team suspensions?, WADA vigilantes, Vino response, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Unanswered questions, Tour de France doping "scandals", State of cycling, Spanish ethics and the A.C. joke, Sinkewitz positive, Secondary testing?, Editorials calling for ending Tour, Rasmussen's location, Quality control and anti doping, Positively False, McQuaid: not the Godfather of cycling, Less mountain stages
  • August 3, Part 2: LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Le Tour, L'affaire Vino, It’s the culture, IOC questioning cycling in Olympics, Greg LeMond is not surprised, Greg LeMond, German TV, Due process, Evans v Contador - the real margin of victory, Doping, the media and the MPCC, Doping, Evans, Dope tests and the tour, Different perspective on doping, David Millar, Cycling revolution, Cadel was robbed, Bruyneel a 'man in black'?, Another drug test result leaked, Andy Hampsten
  • July 27 Part 1: 80's style back in fashion?, A great few days for cycling, Vino excluded, but why the whole team?, Another drug test result leaked, ASO discretion in administering Tour justice, Astana in stage 5, Astana’s tactics, Bad day for Australia, Bloody dopes, Cadel Evans, Catching Vino is good news, Conspiracy?, David "what a joke" Millar, Doping, Doping controls, Tour ethics, German TV, LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, How many big bastards in the peloton?
  • July 27 Part 2: How will cycling survive, Kazahkstan Pie, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, Landis testing, Le maillot jaune is gone, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, The'Vino' scene, Losing time and bouncing back, Losing my religion, Moreau, No, not Vino, Out of season testing and baseline tests, PED's, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Petacchi out
  • July 20: What about team suspensions?, Tyler Hamilton, Stuttgart Worlds, Sinkewitz positive, Petacchi out!, Bad day for Australia, Kessler's lie, Landis and lie detector, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal problems, Greg LeMond, the voice crying out in the desert, Fair doping tests, Drug testing and sequence of recorded results, Revoking le Tours jerseys, Advice for Stapleton and Sinkewitz, Astana in stage 5, Crashes, bike changes & team cars
  • July 13: Fair doping tests, Tyler Hamilton, Tour downright exciting!, Stuttgart(?) Worlds, Rocketing Robbie v tormented Tommy, Armstrong's comment to ASO, Petacchi out, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Intestinal Problems, Incentive for doping, Imagine, UCI agreement, Does the UCI test for blood transfusions?, The real heroes, Bicycle options,
  • July 5: Tour de France boring!, The real heroes, The flying Scotsman, Signing the contract, No Zabriskie?, LeMond and mitochondria myopathy, Incentive for Doping, Bicycle Options, Anti-doping charter, Sale of the century
  • June 29: "The Flying Scotsman",Cancellara,The real heroes, Categorised Climbs, Tour for Devolder and Zabriskie?, Tour de France, boring!,Nationalistic pride, Anti Doping Charter, Bicycle Options, Doping, Doping Coverage - Enough already..., Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 22: Anti Doping Charter, The real heroes, Basso's "suspension", Categorized climbs, Bicycle options, Greg LeMond and record ITT's, It is about us!, Finding the clean winner of the TdF?, Tour de France, BORING!, Prudhomme and the 1996 Tour farce, Riis, the '96 Tour and Prudhomme, Amnesty for doping..., Cycling, doping....???, Who dopes? Who doesn't? Who cares!
  • June 15: Bicycle options, New Trek Madone, A week of confessions, Cycling - not yet a real professional sport, Di Luca's finest win..., Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Giro fever, Amnesty for doping offenses, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Is drafting a known doper cheating?, Let's sort this mess out, Doping hypocrisy, Cycling, doping....?, Prudhomme and the1996 Tour farce, Simoni goes 1850 meters / hour
  • June 8: Di Luca's finest win, Simoni goes 1850 metres / hour, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Andy the Dandy, Three Tour wins for Ullrich?, Ullrich getting screwed, Percentage of pros with asthma, Amnesty for doping offenses, ling - not yet a real professional sport, Doping and cycling, Greg LeMond and record ITTs, Meaningless defense, We are out of denial - Let's look forward
  • June 1, part 1: A thought for cycling's true heroes..., A cunning plan, A great opportunity for the UCI, Admissions of guilt, Let's have some real confessions, Amnesty is the way forward, Suggestions for an amnesty, Amnesty, Amnesty or punishment?, ASO's double standard, Tour Clowns, Bjarne Riis, Bjarne Riis confession, Riis must go, Riis, Basso, Zabel, et al..., Repairing the Magenta Express, Tip of the iceberg, Riis and winning the tour on EPO
  • June 1, part 2: Confessions?, Honour - Seemingly rare in cycling, How deep do you go?, Who do we give it to?, A week of confessions, Peer pressure, Mind boggling hypocrisy, Pro cycling - Sometimes you make it hard to love you, Meaningless defence, Riding with Lance, Lucky Lance, Cheating by proxy, LeMond trying to tear down US riders , So, if Floyd is right..., Thank you Floyd, Floyd Landis hearing, Mr. Young's closing arguments, Something more important..., What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Percentage of pros with asthma:
  • May 23: Landis case live coverage, LeMond a true champion, Questioning LeMond's motives, LeMond trying to tear down US riders, Saint LeMond, Landis and his character, Landis has made cycling a joke, Landis had his drink spiked?, Landis in a corner, Landis polygraph?, Landis' disclosure of information, The quality of Landis' character, Landis' behaviour, Joe Papp
  • May 18: Armstrong can defend himself, Di Brat, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Hoy in sixty seconds, What ever happened to Iban Mayo?, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Italian Reactions to Basso, Who's telling the truth?, Basso + Ullrich = Armstrong?, Basso still a legend, Simoni vs Basso, Basso, Landis etc The new mafia?, Landis to ask UCI to boot Pound, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF?, Percentage of pros with asthma, Unibet at Dunkerque
  • May 11: An attempt at doping?, Almost as bad as Ullrich, Basso admission, Hats off Basso, Basso still a legend, Basso's attempted plea bargain, Basso and Discovery, Discovery's PR, Basso vs Simoni , Truth and Reconciliation Commission, A means to an end, Hypocrisy of the cycling world, Vinokourov to claim second in '05 TdF? , New Puerto plan, Where is the Puerto money?, Time to start re-stating race results, The morals and math of cycling, Chris Hoy's world kilo record attempt , Unibet at Dunkerque, Davide Rebellin
  • May 4: Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Pose with Landis, at a price, Danielson should leave Discovery, Davide Rebellin, The year of the clean Classics?, Basso and Discovery, Basso this, Landis that, Ullrich the other..., Basso, DNA and whatever else, Basso's DNA, Say it ain't so, Johan, Let's cut them some slack!, Armstrong, head and shoulders above?, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, It's not all about the Tour!, Puerto Affair
  • April 27: The year of the clean Classics?, David Rebellin, Call that a race?, Reflecting on Schumacher's win, Danielson should leave Discovery, Inspirational O'Grady and those cobbles, L'Equipe does it again!, Tour de France speaks out, The morals and math of cycling, Basso and Puerto, Puerto, part deux, Gilberto, you were right!, Landis, Armstrong vs the Lab, Pose with Landis, at a price?, Taking blood, Gent-Wevelgem and the Kemmelberg, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles
  • April 20: Stuey wins Roubaix, O'Grady Rocks!, An Aussie in Arenberg, Deep-dish carbon versus the cobbles, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Racing in America, Retesting Floyd's B-samples, Taking blood
  • April 13: Thoughts on Flanders, Crashes at Gent-Wevelgem, Gent-Wevelgem and water bottles, What about that loose water bottle?, T-Mobile one-two, Popo for the Classics, Racing in America, U.S. Open Cycling Championships, Unibet/FdJ/Lotto - Help!, French hypocrites?, Bjarne Riis, Floyd Landis 'B' sample fiasco, Taking blood, Ullrich DNA match
  • April 6: April Fools, Ullrich DNA match, Taking blood, T-Mobile and Puerto, The song remains the same, Ullrich and Hamilton, Tyler Hamilton and flu, Unibet and access into France, Bjarne Riis, Popovych, The death of irony, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons
  • March 30: Basso wind tunnel testing, Bjarne Riis, Riis' response, Drugs in other sports, Dominquez at Redlands, Armstrong boring?, Ullrich/Armstrong comparisons, Popovych - the new Armstrong?, ASO wildcard selections, ASO-UCI split, Boys atop the sport, Cycling at two speeds, Puerto shelved, Tyler Hamilton.
  • March 23: Popovych - the new Armstrong?, A few years ago, Tyler Hamilton, Operación Puerto not complete, Puerto shelved, ASO-UCI split, Drugs in other sports, Basso wind tunnel testing, Water bottle and cage sponsorship, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, The current state of cycling
  • March 16: Don Lefévčre, Lefévčre tries to reinforce omerta, Spring fever, Ullrich's retirement, UCI has no power, Puerto shelved, Who's been taking what?, ProTour a flawed competition?, UCI-Grand Tour organizer dual!, ASO-UCI split, ASO needs to see benefits in ProTour, Sponsorship, drug use and dinosaurs, The current state of cycling, New Pro Cyclist Union, Congratulations to Unibet, Unibet situation, marketing, Tour of California mistake
  • March 9: ASO - UCI split, UCI has no power, UCI vs. ASO, UCI vs. the world, ProTour and contracts, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, Unibet and French law, Unibet situation, Pete Bassinger's Iditarod Trail record ride, Bates' article on Jan Ullrich, Ullrich's retirement, Tour of California expenses, Discovery's profile in Europe, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Floyd's big ride
  • March 2: Ullrich's retirement, Altitude tents and EPO, Home-made altitude tents, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, The agony of Unibet?, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Upside down Disco solved, Tour of California mistake, Graeme Brown, Hats off to Dick Pound?, Grand Tours, who really cares?, ProTour and contracts, ProTour vs wildcards, RCS' decision, UCI vs. the world, Floyd's big ride, Asthma everywhere
  • February 23: Altitude tents and EPO, Tour of California mistake, Chavanel's training regime, Discovery's reasons for pulling sponsorship, Discovery's world upside down?, Tyler Hamilton and drug testing, Grand Tours, who really cares?, The Unibet fiasco: is it that bad?, A solution to the Unibet situation, UCI and the ASO, UCI vs. the world, Will the fight never end?, Paris Nice and others, Pro Tour and contracts, RCS decision, Hats off to Dick Pound, Armstrong owes Dick Pound nothing, Graeme Brown, Asthma everywhere, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 16: T-Mobile, Adam Hanson and doping, Unibet's new jersey, Double standards for Unibet?, RCS decision, A letter to ASO, Hamilton and Tinkov, Discovery Channel, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the cross worlds, Best moment?, Crowd control at the cross worlds, Doping reconciliation, Get into 'cross racing, Pound still wants answers from Armstrong, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • February 9: Unibet show they won't be put down, Double standards for Unibet?, Unibet's new jersey, Asthma everywhere, Bart Wellens' comments at the Cross Worlds, Crowd control at the Cross Worlds, Jonathan Page's mechanic beaten, Cheers to Bradley Wiggins, Bradley Wiggins' comments, Jaksche lashes out, Get into 'cross racing, Le Tour was created to sell newspapers, The stakes are too high, Doping reconciliation, Best moment of 2006?, Ivan Basso interview, Ullrich's DNA sample, Ullrich to Relax-GAM?, Ullrich partners with sports-clothing company, Still love to ride, My perfect state of mountain biking, A terrible model for cycling
  • February 2: The sanctimonious need to be taken out back, Confidentiality of test results, Oscar Pereiro cleared, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Riders' nicknames, Doping reconciliation, Help for Floyd Landis, Museeuw's insults, Sven Nys, The Floyd Fairness Fund, The sorry state of pro-cycling
  • January 26: Drug testing methodologies, Museeuw the PR man, Museeuw's insults, Johan Museeuw and Tyler Hamilton, Sven Nys, Conduct in the pro peloton, McQuaid unhappy with Pereiro, Put doping in the correct context, Moreau wins 2006 TDF, Who wins the 2006 Tour now?, Drapac Porsche's exclusion from the TDU, Bike sponsorship, Compact geometry, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 19: Drapac-Porsche and the TDU, Bettini to win the Ronde?, Frame geometry, Phil Liggett's recently stated views, Prudhomme's zealotry, 3 cheers for Christian Prudhomme, Deutschland Tour, 3 cheers for Saunier Duval, Dick Pound, Fairness in Operation Puerto?, Do the maths, The Floyd Fairness Fund
  • January 12: Dick Pound, Just 'Pound' him, Pound casts doubt on Landis, Pound comments, The Dick and Pat Show, McQuaid starts cultural polemic, Why the Pro Tour model will never work, The Floyd Fairness Fund, Riders' union, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Danny Clark - an inspiration, Allan Peiper, Do the maths, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Justice and America, Lance in Leadville, Tubeless road tires
  • January 5: Danny Clark - an inspiration, Legal standards and cycling, Peter Van Petegem's secret, Lance a no show for Leadville, Cyclo-cross reader poll results, Do the math, A fair trial, Tubeless road tires, Manzano's polygraph test, Blind trust in implicated riders, A terrible state of affairs, Armstrong's credibility - the conspiracy theories, Best ride ever

Letters 2006

  • December 29: Lance in Leadville, Leadville Trail 100, Manzano's polygraph test, British Cycling and the Tour de France, Tell me, what's the problem?, "Disco" team?, Presumption of innocence, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, American culture, Armstrong's credibility, Back room politics and the IPCT
  • December 22: Scott Peoples, Hypocrite?, Landis and the Landaluze case, Landis' defense fund, Rumours and innuendo, Bjarne Riis interview, Enough already, Back room politics and the IPCT, Armstrong's credibility, American culture, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 15: A totally predictable situation?, Armstrong's credibility, Deutschland Tour and Denmark Tour, Back room politics and the IPCT, Holczer and others, Holczer and the Discovery exclusion, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Can't we all just get along?, DNA safety, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Genevieve Jeanson, Mark McGwire, Operación Puerto bungled...deliberately?, Operation Puerto and the UCI
  • December 8: Genevieve Jeanson, Floyd Landis on Real Sports, Deutschland Tour, Bjarne's ignorance factor, USADA does it again, Labs and testing, Astana denied ProTour license, Isaac Gálvez, McQuaid, Question about DNA testing, Le Tour de Langkawi 2007
  • December 1: Hamilton, Isaac Gálvez, USADA does it again, Bjarne's ignorance factor, Shorten the Vuelta?, Vuelta short, shorter, shortest, Labs and testing, Ullrich to CSC, Clean up cycling's own house first, Fed up with doping, Strange sponsorships, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, What's going on behind the scenes?, Graeme Obree
  • November 24: Graeme Obree, What about Leipheimer?, French anti-doping laboratory, Basso agrees to DNA testing, Basso to Discovery, Richard Virenque, UCI are the problem, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 17: Saiz and Tinkoff, Countdown to the 2007 Tour, Improving the reliability of testing, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, Forgetting Tom Simpson, Operación Puerto and national federations, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?. Reverse blood doping, Richard Virenque, What's going on behind the scenes?
  • November 10: Forgetting Tom Simpson, Tour Route, Basso to Discovery, Cycling and DNA testing, What is DNA testing?, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Jan Ullrich, Operación Puerto and national federations, Reverse blood doping, What's going on behind the scenes?, Comments on McQuaid
  • November 3: Tour Route, Return of a real good guy, Cameron Jennings, Future Australian ProTour team, Neil Stephens, 2007 Tour Intro Video Snub, Richard Virenque, Reverse blood doping, Comments on McQuaid, Marc Madiot, Who's more damaging?, What's going on behind the scenes?, Wada & Cycling's Governing Body, UCI and Doping, The Pope of Cycling and the Spanish Inquisition, Refusing DNA testing - an admission of guilt?, Put up or shut up!, DNA, its so ‘easy', DNA Testing In Cycling

The complete Cyclingnews letters archive